The Internet Vocabulary Test for Children: preliminary development
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Currently, the only mechanisms to determine children's use of the Internet are interviews and questionnaires. To increase the validity of theory and research and ensure that practitioners and policy‐makers are guided by accurate information, an improved method of determining children's patterns of Internet use is required. The purpose of this study is to present the Internet Vocabulary Test for Children (IVTC) as a measure of Internet use in children. Design/methodology/approach The IVTC requires oral definition of ten terms (Internet, gamer, e‐mail, search engine, chat, online games, instant messaging, cheats, web site, browser). An elementary school in rural western Canada agreed to participate in trial administration of the IVTC. All children in first through sixth grade were invited to participate ( n =149). Parents completed a consent form and a questionnaire. A total of 128 children (62 males and 66 females) were administered the IVTC. Findings Trial administration of the IVTC established the viability of determining children's use of the Internet with a test of expressive vocabulary. Originality/value Given the rate of population penetration coupled with rapidly changing technology, measuring children's Internet use presents challenges. Simple solutions such as the development of software and firmware to monitor children's online behavior may provide misinformation. That is, surveillance influences behavior and children's Internet activities often involve multiple users. The IVTC is not vulnerable to biased responding, is inexpensive, and easily administered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it