MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995162229 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v5n1p108

Evaluating the Moral Intelligence of the Late Childhood (9-12) Years in Jordan: Al-Karak Governorate Case

2015· article· en· W1995162229 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Intisar Turki Aldarabah, Reham Almohtadi, Mustafa Jwaifell, Raed Omar Salah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims to revealing the moral intelligence level of the late childhood stage’s children (9-12) years old in Al-Karak governorate in Jordan. In addition, revealing the differences according the variables (gender, family age, parent educational level, family size) on the level of the moral intelligence of the late childhood children’s stage (9-12) years old in Al-Karak governorate in Jordan. Research population consists of the children whose ages range from (9-12) years old in Al-Karak governorate in Jordan, they are the children that pertain to the late childhood stage, which means the children who study in the third, fourth , fifth and sixth grades. After treating the data with the relevant statistical methods, the results showed that the level of moral intelligence was at a medium level of the late childhood children’s stage (9-12) years old in Al-Karak governorate in Jordan. Moreover, the results indicated that there were no significant differences between the moral intelligence of the children according to (gender, family size, parent’s educational level). On the other hand, the study showed there was a significant difference between the moral intelligence on the late childhood children’s stage (9-12) years old in Al-Karak governorate in Jordan on the variable of parent’s age.

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)0.001
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207