The KiddyCAT: A Test-Retest Reliability Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research with the Communication Attitude Test for Preschool and Kindergarten Children who Stutter (KiddyCAT) in the United States, Italy and Poland has shown that, as a group, preschool and kindergarten children who stutter report, as of the age of three, already significantly more in the way of a negative attitude toward speech compared to their nonstuttering peers. In addition to its discriminative usefulness, the test’s validity has been established. What still needed to be determined was the KiddyCAT’s test-retest reliability, which was the aim of this investigation. In order to do so, a Dutch form of the KiddyCAT was administered to a sample of 34 stuttering and 42 nonstuttering children between the age of three and six on two separate occasions. After the initial testing, the children were retested a week to 12 days later. For both groups of participants, the scores of the first and second test administration correlated significantly, and the average scores did not differ from each other to a statistically significant extent. Thus, the repeated administration of the test revealed that the obtained first and second test scores were highly dependent and predictable from each other, and stable over time. As a side issue, it was, once again, confirmed that the scores of the children who do and do not stutter differed to a statistically significant extent.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".