MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987690280 · doi:10.1037/h0087237

Language Competence, Narrative Ability, and School Readiness in Low-Income Preschool Children.

2004· article· en· W1987690280 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lisa Fiorentino, Nina Howe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyLow incomeCompetence (human resources)Developmental psychologyNarrativeSocioeconomic statusLinguisticsSocial psychologySocioeconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les habiletes linguistiques, la capacite narrative et la maturite scolaire ont ete examinees chez 25 enfants d'âge prescolaire, provenant de familles a faible revenu et frequentant des services de garde. Les habiletes linguistiques (PPVT-R) et la maturite scolaire des participants ont ete evaluees (Early Development Instrument); ces derniers devaient egalement raconter des histoires inspirees d'evenements de tous les jours ayant pour cadre leur foyer (MacArthur Story Stem Battery). Chaque histoire etait codee selon le niveau de chronologie, d'organisation et le nombre d'unites d'information. Les enfants qui ont obtenu les niveaux les plus eleves d'habiletes linguistiques et de maturite scolaire ont raconte des histoires qui etaient bien ordonnees du point de vue chronologique et bien organisees. La narration de recits s'avere sans doute un moyen efficace de comprendre les habiletes globales des enfants et leur capacite a s'adapter; elle peut egalement devenir une habilete essentielle a developper dans les services de garde et, par la suite, dans le milieu scolaire.

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)0.008
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations75
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportementSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207