MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015873113 · doi:10.1177/0270467607311488

Closing the Barn Door: The Effect of Parental Supervision on Canadian Children's Online Privacy

2007· article· en· W2015873113 on OpenAlexaffabout
Valerie Steeves, Cheryl Marie Webster

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternet privacyParental supervisionThe InternetPsychologyClosing (real estate)Social psychologyDevelopmental psychologyBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical data from a large sample of Canadian youth aged 13 to 17 years suggest that, although the current privacy policy framework is having a positive effect on the extent to which young people are complying with the types of behavior promoted by adults as privacy protective, its primary focus on parental supervision is inadequate to fully protect children's online privacy. Respondents with high levels of either social interaction or identity play are more likely than those with lower levels to divulge personal identifiers and display privacy-risky behavior, independent of their level of parental supervision. High levels of parental supervision, therefore, do not eliminate but merely reduce privacy-risky behaviors associated with social uses of the Internet. As such, parental supervision cannot adequately protect children who have integrated the Net most fully into their social lives, especially given the high premium that children place on the use of the Net to talk to friends and explore social roles.

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)0.019
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations36
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Science Technology & SocietySame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207