MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061303780 · doi:10.1037/h0087211

"Street Kids": Towards an Understanding of Their Motivational Context.

2004· article· en· W2061303780 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Donald M. Taylor, John E. Lydon, Évelyne Bougie, Kiraz Johannesen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyContext (archaeology)Social psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La presente recherche visait a etudier les comportements et les buts quotidiens d'un echantillon de jeunes sans-abri en milieu urbain, ou comme ils preferent se faire appeler « des jeunes de la rue ». La difficulte de choisir un echantillon temoin approprie a ete surmontee en comparant des jeunes de la rue a deux echantillons distincts; des etudiants universitaires et des jeunes d'un club communautaire dans un quartier pauvre. Une entrevue standard a ete menee au cours de laquelle les jeunes devaient, un a un, se rappeler leurs comportements quotidiens, d'heure en heure, et ils etaient notes sur une echelle de dix points, sur une serie de questions portant sur la motivation, les modeles de comportement, la confiance et le bien-etre psychologique et physique. Les resultats revelent que les jeunes de la rue ne semblent pas avoir un ensemble coherent de buts a moyen et a long terme. De plus, ils n'ont pas confiance envers les autorites et ne les respectent pas, non plus qu'ils ne jouissent d'amities stables reposant sur la confiance et l'admiration. Cependant, le petit nombre de jeunes qui ont un ami de confiance sont davantage motives de facon intrinseque et ont tendance a se sentir moins irritables et moins anxieux.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.119 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations32
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportementSame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207