MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1663706210

Youngsters about friendship

2013· article· en· W1663706210 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Živa Rigler

Bibliographic record

VenuePeFprints (University of Ljubljana) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues in Poland
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipConversationEveryday lifeQuarter (Canadian coin)Active listeningPsychologyPeer groupSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCommunicationPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the thesis is to present peer relationships in quarter communities Šiška. In the theoretical part adolescence as one of the most important transitions in the life span of an individual is presented. Friendship, peer relationships as well as conflicts, which are part of everyday life, are described. As youngsters in transition from early to middle adolescence or from primary to secondary school are less interested in taking part in organised leisure activities and as pupils who are not taking part in organised leisure activities often spend their leisure time in a passive way – listening to music, watching films or TV, the theoretical part also focuses on the importance of leisure time. Furthermore, the theoretical part of the thesis presents youth centres and their aim with regard to the role of youngsters in the society. \nThe empirical part of the thesis presents the results of the qualitative research in which the author interviewed youngsters visiting the quarter youth centre. The results show that peers play an important role in the adolescence. As regards friendship, confidence, respect and the possibility of conversation are most important for them. It is important for them that they meet each other as often as possible. They are aware of the fact that conflicts, which they resolve quickly and effectively, are part of everyday life. Peer groups they are members of have not been formed completely, that is why the relation to the group leaders is negative. They often spend their leisure time in the quarter youth centre, which offers the possibility of keeping in touch with peers and meeting new friends. \n

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeFprints (University of Ljubljana)Same topicSocial Issues in PolandFrench-language works237,207