MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911141344 · doi:10.1111/sode.12104

Helping Children Help: The Relation between Maternal Scaffolding and Children's Early Help

2014· article· en· W1911141344 on OpenAlexafffund
Stuart I. Hammond, Jeremy I. M. Carpendale

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHelpfulnessPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyReading (process)TemperamentEarly childhoodSocial psychologyPersonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Theory and empirical research suggest that parental scaffolding of children's participation in chores may contribute to the development of early helping. Sixty mother–child dyads with toddlers between 18 and 24 months of age were assessed on two measures of scaffolding (during a cleanup chore; reading an emotionally laden book together). Children's helping was assessed in five tasks with an experimenter, and children were also assessed for social approach to an unfamiliar adult as a measure of sociability, and for internal state language as a measure of social understanding. Both mothers' scaffolding of everyday helping and children's sociability uniquely predicted individual differences in children's helping. Thus, individual differences in children's helping appear early, and are associated with both temperament and with parents' efforts to support and encourage young children's helpfulness.

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)0.015
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations90
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial DevelopmentSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207