MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006968072 · doi:10.5539/ies.v6n4p29

Positive Development, Sense of Belonging, and Support of Peers among Early Adolescents: Perspectives of Different Actors

2013· article· en· W2006968072 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Marie Drolet, Isabelle Arcand

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsActive listeningPsychologyQualitative researchPositive Youth DevelopmentDevelopmental psychologyPeer influenceFriendshipSocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trusting relationships at school and within other social networks emerge as protective factors that are crucial to the positive development of early adolescents. School is one of the critical environments where they can develop a sense of belonging. This study involved 20 qualitative interviews with school staff and youth workers recruited from social services and high schools in Eastern Ontario and 12 qualitative interviews with adolescents 12-13 years of age attending some of these same schools. Deductive and inductive analysis of the transcripts clearly underscored the importance of the supportive roles played by peers, teachers and non-family adults in the lives of early teens. The proximity that results from listening to and accompanying early adolescents in day-to-day activities, and comprehending their issues, presents an opportunity for youth workers and school staff to better grasp how to become credible, trusted and legitimate in the eyes of young teens.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations53
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207