MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094106435 · doi:10.1080/1034912022000007270

A Meta-Analysis of School-Age Children's Attitudes Towards Persons with Physical or Intellectual Disabilities

2002· article· en· W2094106435 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Nowicki, Robert Sandieson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Disability Development and Education · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Intellectual disabilityPsychologyMeta-analysisPhysical disabilityDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Factors associated with children's attitudes towards persons with physical and intellectual disabilities were examined in a meta-analysis spanning the years 1990 to 2000. A total of 20 studies met the inclusion criteria allowing for 65 comparisons across 2,240 participants. Factors of interest were attitudinal components, type of disability, age and gender of respondents, and role of inclusion. The majority of research findings revealed that children preferred target children without disabilities compared to targets with physical or intellectual disabilities. Three methods for calculating average effect sizes were used: (a) unweighted means, (b) weighted means, and (c) vote counting. It was concluded that biases in attitudes do exist but that summary results need to be interpreted with regard to individual study differences and the methods used to calculate mean effect sizes.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.033
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations302
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Disability Development and EducationSame topicInclusion and Disability in Education and SportFrench-language works237,207