MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044108000 · doi:10.1037/cjep2006010

Type of items and the magnitude of gender differences on the Mental Rotations Test.

2006· article· en· W2044108000 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of New Brunswick
KeywordsMental rotationPsychologyAffect (linguistics)Test (biology)Differential effectsMagnitude (astronomy)Differential (mechanical device)Developmental psychologySocial psychologyCognitionCommunicationMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study considered the structure of the drawings used in the Mental Rotations Test (MRT) to examine whether distractors that are either a mirror image or structurally different from the target as well as response alternatives with occluded and nonoccluded parts affect the magnitude of gender differences on this test. One hundred and three women and 100 men undergraduate students were given unlimited time to complete the MRT. A gender by occlusion interaction on correct responses showed that gender differences were larger for occluded than for nonoccluded items. Examination of performance as a function of item placement in the test suggested that it is unlikely that the results could be accounted for by differential practice effects in women and men. Implications of these results for explanations of gender differences on the MRT and for the training of spatial abilities are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.238 · 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