Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lorsqu’un chercheur en éducation entreprend une recherche qui implique des sujets (élèves, administrateurs, professeurs, expérimentateurs,...), il instaure un réseau de relations qui n’est pas sans influencer les résultats de ses travaux. À partir de certaines situations de recherche, cet article envisage les différents types de contaminations qui originent de ces relations : que ce soit dans le recueil des données (stéréotypie, halo, etc...), dans la production des preformances (exaltation, consignes implicites, défense, effet Rosenthal, etc...), ou dans leur combinaison (effet Pygmalion). Ensuite, à l’occasion de l’analyse d’une recherche psycho-pharmacologique réalisée en milieu éducatif, se dégage un plan d’expérience (à 6 groupes) qui, combiné à la stratégie du double aveugle, a pour fin de contrôler les contaminations d’abord envisagées.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".