MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576151126 · doi:10.1111/sode.12142

Trajectories of Breadth of Participation in Organized Activity During Childhood

2015· article· en· W1576151126 on OpenAlexafffund
Florence Aumètre, François Poulin

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyGroup (periodic table)Developmental psychologyProsocial behaviorFamily incomeDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study aimed to identify the trajectories of breadth of participation in organized activities during childhood and to examine the predictors of membership in these trajectories (child's individual and family characteristics measured in Kindergarten). A sample of 1038 children, recruited in Kindergarten, was assessed yearly between Kindergarten and grade 4. Semiparametric group‐based modeling brought out four trajectories: the no participation group (13.5 percent), the increasing group (26.4 percent), the decreasing group (14.1 percent), and the high group (46.1 percent). Prosociality predicted membership in the no participation group, as compared with the increasing group. Social withdrawal predicted membership in the no participation group, as compared with the high group. High family income and higher maternal education predicted membership in the increasing, decreasing, and high trajectory groups, as compared with the no participation group. Higher paternal education predicted membership in the high group, as compared with the increasing group. Overall, family variables had a greater impact than individual variables on the probability that the child would participate in a broader range of organized activities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial DevelopmentSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207