MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005549104 · doi:10.1348/000712606x105714

Cross‐sectional and longitudinal relations between mother‐child talk about conflict and children's social understanding

2006· article· en· W2005549104 on OpenAlex
Timothy P. Racine, Jeremy I. M. Carpendale, William Turnbull

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyExplanatory modelSocial psychologySocial conflictSocial relationLongitudinal studyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the relations between the ways 48 mothers and their 3- to 5-year-olds talked about a conflict depicted in a picture book and their children's current and subsequent level of social understanding. We distinguished explanatory talk, which directed attention to the actions that generated the conflict, from non-explanatory talk, which discussed the conflict in terms of, for example, making up or saying sorry. Controlling for child age and overall talk by mother, explanatory talk was positively associated with contemporaneous social understanding. Social understanding at time one was also positively associated with social understanding 30 months later. These data suggest that dialogue about conflict may be helpful for 3- to 5-year old children's understanding of the mental world, to the extent that it facilitates their understanding of particular social situations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.290 · 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