Preschoolers’ talk about future situations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted 2 experiments that examined 3-year-olds’ ability to talk about future situations involving the self. In both experiments, children participated in a trip task. In this task, children were asked to choose various items that might be required on a trip, and to explain their choices verbally. A coding scheme that captured both the dimensions of futurity and uncertainty was developed to categorize children’s explanations. In addition, children were administered the Test of Early Language Development-2 (TELD-2) (Hresko, Reid & Hammill, 1991). Results from both experiments indicated that children’s language was beginning to reflect an ability to anticipate various situations involving the self that might arise during the course of a trip. The correlation between children’s scores on the trip task and their scores on the TELD-2 was positive, but not statistically significant. We discuss factors, other than general language ability, that may contribute to children’s talk, and thought, about the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it