MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073551066 · doi:10.2466/pr0.98.2.549-555

Can Business and Economics Students Perform Elementary Arithmetic?

2006· article· en· W2073551066 on OpenAlexaff
Lionel Standing, Robert Sproule, Ambrose Leung

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovations in Educational Methods
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)PsychologyTest anxietyMathematics educationSubject (documents)ArithmeticAnxietyStatisticsMathematicsComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Business and economics majors (N=146) were tested on the D'Amore Test of Elementary Arithmetic, which employs third-grade test items from 1932. Only 40% of the subjects passed the test by answering 10 out of 10 items correctly. Self-predicted scores were a good predictor of actual scores, but performance was not associated with demographic variables, grades in calculus courses, liking for science or computers, or mathematics anxiety. Scores decreased over the subjects' initial years on campus. The hardest test item, with an error rate of 23%, required the subject to evaluate (36 x 7) + (33 x 7). The results are similar to those of Standing in 2006, despite methodological changes intended to maximize performance.

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)0.008
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.390 · 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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicInnovations in Educational MethodsFrench-language works237,207