MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137903938 · doi:10.1017/s0142716405050186

Paths to phonemic awareness in Japanese: Evidence from a training study

2005· article· en· W2137903938 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Goetry, Satsuky Urbain, José Morais, Régine Kolinsky

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Psycholinguistics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Academy of EducationSpencer Foundation
KeywordsKanaPsychologyPhonemic awarenessReading (process)Phonological awarenessCognitive psychologyLinguisticsKanjiPedagogyChinese charactersLiteracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although phonemic awareness does not usually develop outside the acquisition of alphabetic reading, nonnegligible phoneme manipulation abilities have been reported in Japanese fourth graders who knew only thekana, nonalphabetic, writing system. The present contribution explored whether some characteristics of this system may facilitate phonemic awareness in Japanese children. In two distinct training studies, the pre- and posttest phonemic awareness abilities of three groups were compared, one trained with explicit reference to some organizational aspects of the kana matrix, one trained without such reference, and one control. Training was effective in both studies, especially when displaying explicit reference to the kana system. Some features of this system thus seem helpful in drawing Japanese children's attention to phonemic constituents.

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)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied PsycholinguisticsSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207