Developmental Differences in Children's Use of Rating Scales
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
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of child age and number of response choices on children's tendency to respond at the extremes of Likert-type scales rating emotional states. METHODS: Sixty children (5-6 years, 7-9 years, 10-12 years) were randomly assigned to use either three or five response choices in providing ratings in three different task conditions. Tasks were designed to have correct choices at the midpoints of the rating scales. Children also completed a self-report feelings questionnaire. RESULTS: Results showed that younger children responded in an extreme manner when rating emotion-based, but not physical, tasks. Children's extreme scores did not vary as a function of number of response choices used. More extreme scores on the three tasks were related to more extreme scores on the feelings questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that young children may respond in an extreme manner when rating emotional states. Researchers and clinicians should take this into account when interpreting children's self-reporting ratings.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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