MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095581107 · doi:10.1177/0145445512461650

Immediate and Subsequent Effects of Matched and Unmatched Stimuli on Targeted Vocal Stereotypy and Untargeted Motor Stereotypy

2012· article· en· W2095581107 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavior Modification · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStereotypyPsychologyStimulus (psychology)AudiologyDevelopmental psychologyStimulationNeuroscienceCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors evaluated the effects of matched and unmatched stimuli on immediate and subsequent engagement in targeted vocal stereotypy (Experiment 1) and untargeted motor stereotypy (Experiment 2). Results of Experiment 1 showed that (a) matched stimulation decreased immediate engagement in vocal stereotypy for 8 of 11 participants and increased subsequent engagement in vocal stereotypy for only 1 of the 8 participants and (b) unmatched stimulation decreased immediate engagement in vocal stereotypy for only 1 of 10 participants and did not increase subsequent engagement in vocal stereotypy for this participant. Results of Experiment 2 showed that for 8 of 14 participants, untargeted stereotypy increased when the matched or unmatched stimulus was present, after it was removed, or both. The authors briefly discuss the potential clinical implications of using matched stimulation to decrease vocal stereotypy and limitations of the findings.

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 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 score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.207 · 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