MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143814548 · doi:10.1017/s014271640809005x

Children's spoken word recognition and contributions to phonological awareness and nonword repetition: A 1-year follow-up

2008· article· en· W2143814548 on OpenAlexafffund
Jamie L. Metsala, Despina Stavrinos, Amanda C. Walley

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Psycholinguistics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMount Saint Vincent University
KeywordsRepetition (rhetorical device)PsychologyVocabularyWord recognitionPhonological awarenessWord (group theory)Reading (process)Task (project management)Spoken wordLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This study examined effects of lexical factors on children's spoken word recognition across a 1-year time span, and contributions to phonological awareness and nonword repetition. Across the year, children identified words based on less input on a speech-gating task. For word repetition, older children improved for the most familiar words. There was a competition effect for the word repetition task, but this effect was present only for the most familiar words on the gating task. Recognition for words from sparse neighborhoods predicted phonological awareness 1 year later, and children poorer at recognizing these words in Year 1 scored lower on word reading in Year 2. Spoken word recognition also accounted for unique variance in nonword repetition across the 1-year time span. Findings are discussed in terms of understanding the effects of vocabulary growth on spoken word recognition, phonological awareness, and nonword repetition.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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