MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

True and False Memories in Maltreated Children

2004· article· en· W2148534981 on OpenAlexaff
Mark L. Howe, Dante Cicchetti, Sheree L. Toth, Beth M. Cerrito

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeception detection and forensic psychology
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyFalse memoryDevelopmental psychologyChild abuseChild neglectChild developmentPoison controlInjury preventionCognitive psychologyMedical emergencyRecallMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Differences in basic memory processes between maltreated and nonmaltreated children were examined in an experiment in which middle-socioeconomic-status (SES; N = 60), low-SES maltreated (N = 48), and low-SES nonmaltreated (N = 51) children (ages 5-7, 8-9, and 10-12 years) studied 12 Deese-Roediger-McDermott lists. Using recall and recognition measures, the results showed that both true and false memories increased with age and, contrary to some speculation, these trends did not differ as a function of maltreatment status. However, there were differences in overall memory performance as a function of SES. These results are discussed in the broader framework of children's memory development and the effects of the chronic stress associated with child maltreatment on basic memory processes.

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)0.010
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations111
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild DevelopmentSame topicDeception detection and forensic psychologyFrench-language works237,207