MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W20836145 · doi:10.1123/apaq.30.2.103

Self-Regulation as a Mediator in Motor Learning: The Effect of the Cognitive Orientation to Occupational Performance Approach on Children With DCD

2013· article· en· W20836145 on OpenAlexaff
Claire Sangster Jokić, Helene J. Polatajko, David Whitebread

Bibliographic record

VenueAdapted Physical Activity Quarterly · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMotor skillMotor coordinationDevelopmental psychologyCompetence (human resources)CognitionPsychomotor learningSocial psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) experience difficulty performing everyday motor tasks. It is has been suggested that children with DCD have fewer self-regulatory (SR) skills with which to acquire motor skills. This article presents the results of an exploratory study examining the development of SR competence among ten 7-9-year-old children with DCD participating in the Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) program (Polatajko & Mandich, 2004). Using a quantitative observational coding method, children's SR behavior was examined and compared across intervention sessions. Results indicate that children demonstrating improved motor performance similarly demonstrated more independent and effective SR behaviors. In contrast, children whose motor performance remained relatively stable failed to demonstrate such a change. These findings suggest that CO-OP enables SR performance among children with motor performance difficulties and, as a result, facilitates improved task 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)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdapted Physical Activity QuarterlySame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207