MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064938134 · doi:10.1080/02702711.2012.724043

Impact of Reading Strategy Use on Girls’ and Boys’ Achievement

2014· article· en· W2064938134 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yamina Bouchamma, Vincent Poulin, Catherine Ruel

Bibliographic record

VenueReading Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)PsychologyMeaning (existential)Test (biology)Sentence completion testsDevelopmental psychologySentenceAcademic achievementGRASPMathematics educationAchievement testStandardized testLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the reading strategies of boys and girls and identified those determining academic achievement in 13-year-old Canadian students. Students from each province and one territory (N = 20,094) answered a questionnaire on, among others, reading strategies. T-test results showed that girls use these strategies more regularly compared to boys. Logistical regression indicated that the same strategies determined reading achievement in both groups, namely, making connections with past knowledge, looking at other words in the sentence to grasp the meaning, rereading the more difficult parts, and adapting reading speed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReading PsychologySame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207