MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068891416 · doi:10.1080/13803395.2014.985191

Laterality, spatial abilities, and accident proneness

2015· article· en· W2068891416 on OpenAlexafffund
Susan D. Voyer, Daniel Voyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLateralityPsychologyMental rotationDichotic listeningSpatial abilityAudiologyTest (biology)Developmental psychologyCognitive psychologyCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although handedness as a measure of cerebral specialization has been linked to accident proneness, more direct measures of laterality are rarely considered. The present study aimed to fill that gap in the existing research. In addition, individual difference factors in accident proneness were further examined with the inclusion of mental rotation and navigation abilities measures. One hundred and forty participants were asked to complete the Mental Rotations Test, the Santa Barbara Sense of Direction scale, the Greyscales task, the Fused Dichotic Word Test, the Waterloo Handedness Questionnaire, and a grip strength task before answering questions related to number of accidents in five areas. Results indicated that handedness scores, absolute visual laterality score, absolute response time on the auditory laterality index, and navigation ability were significant predictors of the total number of accidents. Results are discussed with respect to cerebral hemispheric specialization and risk-taking attitudes and behavior.

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 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 score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical and Experimental NeuropsychologySame topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207