MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130438219 · doi:10.1080/17470210500246269

Preschoolers out of adults: Discriminative learning with a cognitive load

2005· article· en· W2130438219 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvain Sirois, Thomas R. Shultz

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyTask (project management)Cognitive psychologyCognitionOvertrainingPerceptionDiscrimination learningMediationAutomaticityPerceptual learningCognitive loadDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores novel predictions from the spontaneous overtraining interpretation of human discrimination shift learning (Sirois & Shultz, 1998a). Results from six experiments where adults perform a discrimination shift task with or without a cognitive distractor are reported. In three experiments with a concurrent distractor task (Experiments 1A, 2A, and 3A), performance of adults is comparable to what would be expected from preschoolers performing only the learning task. These adults show no dimensional transfer from initial learning, unless new attributes are introduced in shift learning. On the same tasks without a cognitive load (Experiments 1B, 2B, and 3B), performance is typical of normal adults. The discussion focuses on the relative ability of competing theoretical models (i.e., levels of processing, attentional mediation, and perceptual differentiation) to account for these data.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly Journal of Experimental PsychologySame topicChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207