Social Profile: Assessment of Validity and Reliability with Preschool Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Social Profile evaluates the social participation levels of children in activity groups and is based on the concepts of group social participation, interaction behavioural skills, and process factors. The 7 factors for each of the group levels in the Social Profile are cooperation, norms, roles, communication, activity behaviour, power and attraction. PURPOSE: This study evaluates the validity and reliability of the Social Profile. METHOD: A panel of eleven judges examined the content of the Social Profile and their recommendations were incorporated. Two occupational therapy observers measured group skills in 15 preschool groups of typically developing children. RESULTS: Cluster analysis of the study data indicated distinctions between skill clusters of social participation levels. Factor analysis confirmed these theoretical and clinical field component factors as distinct behaviours. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The Social Profile has the potential to be used with a wide range of children to assess and treat their social skill deficits. Occupational therapy students and clinicians can use the assessment for training and to expand their observational abilities for evaluating social skills.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".