MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1880670864 · doi:10.7202/1028216ar

Compréhension des émotions et inhibition chez des enfants avec ou sans déficience intellectuelle

2014· article· fr· W1880670864 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Véronique Treillet, Colette Jourdan-Ionescu, Isabelle Blanchette

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelle · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresInnovation and Economic Development Trois Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude comparative (enfants DI et non DI) vise à vérifier le lien entre la compréhension des émotions et l’inhibition (émotionnelle et exécutive) selon des mesures directes (tâches informatisées) et indirectes (questionnaire aux parents). Deux groupes d’enfants (N. total=32), appariés sur l’âge mental, ont complété un test de compréhension des émotions (approche globale) et deux tâches Stroop (émotionnel et verbal). Les parents ont rempli un questionnaire sur l’inhibition comportementale. Les résultats montraient que les enfants présentant une DI ont un même niveau de compréhension des émotions que les non DI. Cependant, les analyses corrélationnelles montrent des différences entre les groupes dans les liens entre les variables. Les résultats suggèrent donc des dynamiques développementales différentes pour les enfants avec ou sans DI.

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)0.004
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelleSame topicChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207