Development of role‐differentiated bimanual manipulation during the infant's first year
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
Role-differentiated bimanual manipulation (RDBM) is a complementary movement of both hands that requires differentiation between actions of the hands. Previous research showed that RDBM can be observed in infants as early as 7 months. However, RDBM could be considered a skill only when its frequency, duration, and use is appropriate for the type of manual task, and there is some evidence of intentionality in use. Twenty-four normally developing infants were studied longitudinally at 7, 9, 11, and 13 months to assess the frequency and duration of five clearly different types of RDBM with three "single-part" and three "two-part" toys as they emerge during development. Also, the sequences of actions that lead to RDBM were examined for evidence of "intentionality." The results show that although the each type of RDBM appears early in infancy, RDBM only begins to exhibit the characters of a skill by 13 months. Moreover, the type of toy influences not only the likelihood of eliciting role differentiation, but also the type of RDBM behavior and the organization of the sequence of actions that lead to RDBM. Some useful criteria for defining an infant sensorimotor skill are provided in discussion.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it