MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047127618 · doi:10.1002/acp.1636

‘And I was very very crying’: Children's self‐descriptions of distress as predictors of recall

2009· article· en· W2047127618 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

VenueApplied Cognitive Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInfant Health and Development
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRecallCryingPsychologyDistressDevelopmental psychologyFree recallClinical psychologyPsychiatryCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One hundred and forty‐five children's (2–13‐year‐olds) self‐descriptions of how much they cried when injured and subsequently treated in a hospital emergency room were used as predictors of their recall accuracy, completeness and number of unique details in interviews occurring a week, a year and 2 years later. Hierarchical regressions showed that stress was related to all three ways of evaluating children's recall of their injury in initial interviews, although only the completeness of hospital recall was related to stress. For accuracy, stress compromised recall of 2–6‐year‐olds in initial but not later interviews; for completeness, stress compromised recall of both events in initial but not later interviews. In contrast, highly distressed children provided the most detail in their first two interviews and the oldest children still did so 2 years later. However, stress effects were modest. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.356 · 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