MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034720383 · doi:10.1159/000272437

Stage Acquisition and Stage Use

2009· article· en· W2034720383 on OpenAlexaff
Charles G. Levine

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEthics in Business and Education
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)PsychologyStage theoryDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyCognitive scienceGeologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper evaluates two developmental perspectives on moral reasoning. While their interpretations differ, both perspectives use stage displacement models to depict moral development. These perspectives assume that as ontogenesis proceeds, the role played by earlier acquired moral stages becomes increasingly insignificant in comparison with the role played by more advanced stages. The discussion argues that the use of displacement models inhibits an adequate integration and understanding of the research findings on moral development. A nondisplacement perspective is outlined to correct for this deficiency.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.336
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.103 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman DevelopmentSame topicEthics in Business and EducationFrench-language works237,207