Working memory, cognitive style, and behavioural predictors of GCSE exam success
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
This study investigates the interplay of working memory, cognitive style, and behaviour. Year 8 (aged 13 years) students (n = 205) at a UK urban secondary school were tested to ascertain predictors of General Certificate of School Education (GCSE) achievement. Assessment included Riding's cognitive style dimensions, working memory capacity, and a profile of school behaviour. A stepwise multiple regression analysis indicated that behaviour, working memory, verbal–imagery style by working memory, wholist–analytic style by working memory, and verbal–imagery style by wholist–analytic style predicted GCSE outcome, accounting for 58% of the variance. Generally, poor GCSE grade points were predicted by low behaviour scores, and by low working memory capacity in analytics and verbalisers. The results are discussed in terms of possible interventions that may improve student GCSE performance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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