MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002512778 · doi:10.1007/s12310-013-9110-8

Modeling the Mental Health Practice Change Preferences of Educators: A Discrete-Choice Conjoint Experiment

2013· article· en· W2002512778 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles E. Cunningham, Melanie Barwick, Kathy Short, Yvonne Chen, Heather Rimas, Jenna Ratcliffe, Stephanie Mielko

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Mental Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids FoundationHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster University
KeywordsConjoint analysisMental healthDiscrete choicePsychologyApplied psychologyPreferenceSocial psychologyEconometricsPsychiatryMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schools are sometimes slow to adopt evidence-based strategies for improving the mental health outcomes of students. This study used a discrete-choice conjoint experiment to model factors influencing the decision of educators to adopt strategies for improving children’s mental health outcomes. A sample of 1,010 educators made choices between hypothetical mental health practice change strategies composed by systematically varying the four levels of 16 practice change attributes. Latent class analysis yielded two segments with different practice change preferences. Both segments preferred small-group workshops, conducted by engaging experts, teaching skills applicable to all students. Participants expressed little interest in Internet options. The support of colleagues, administrators, and unions exerted a strong influence on the practice change choices of both segments. The Change Ready segment, 77.1 % of the sample, was more intent on adopting new strategies to improve the mental health of students. They preferred that schools, rather than the provincial ministry of education, make practice change decisions, coaching was provided to all participants, and participants received post-training follow-up sessions. The Demand Sensitive segment (22.9 %) was less intent on practice change. They preferred that individual teachers make practice change decisions, recommended discretionary coaching, and chose no post-training follow-up support. This study emphasizes the complex social, organizational, and policy context within which educators make practice change decisions. Efforts to disseminate strategies to improve the mental health outcomes of students need to be informed by the preferences of segments of educators who are sensitive to different dimensions of the practice change process. In the absence of a broad consensus of educators, administrators, and unions, potentially successful practice changes are unlikely to be adopted.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations48
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Mental HealthSame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207