MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135957198 · doi:10.7202/017239ar

La prédiction des contacts avec le tribunal de la jeunesse : utilisation de l’évaluation du comportement par les pairs au début de l’école primaire

2005· article· en· W2135957198 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Richard E. Tremblay, Lise Desmarais-Gervais, Marc Leblanc, Alexandre Schwartzman

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminologie · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalConcordia UniversityInternational Centre for Comparative CriminologyResearch Unit on Children's Psychosocial Maladjustment
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDictionHumanitiesDevelopmental psychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study sets out to verify to what extent the evaluations of the behaviour of children by their peers in first year primary school make it possible to predict those who will eventually end up with an open record at the Juvenile Court. During their first year at school the children are classified according to the following categories : aggressive, socially withdrawn, aggressive-withdrawn, neither aggressive/nor withdrawn (contrast). A total of 992 subjects (493 girls and 499 boys) were evaluated at two different times during the study. The results indicate that the “aggressive-withdrawn” subjects, among the girls, are more likely to have an open record at the Court during the 7 or 8 years after having been evaluated in first year primary school. These findings may indicate that the girls whose behaviour is aberrant are more easily identified by their peers, given the fact that they generally have fewer problems of adaptation than the boys during their first year of school.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminologieSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207