MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149221878 · doi:10.1525/sop.2009.52.2.235

Is it Too Late Baby? Pinpointing the Emergence of a Black-White Test Score Gap in Infancy

2009· article· en· W2149221878 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociological Perspectives · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopmental psychologyTest scoreWhite (mutation)PsychologyTest (biology)CohortHuman capitalEarly childhoodDemographyMedicineSociologyEconomicsStandardized testEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research attempts to uncover when the black-white test score gap begins and why it exists by examining a nationally representative sample of infants using the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort. The findings demonstrate that there is a small raw gap in cognitive skills between the infants of white and black mothers in the United States. However, through structural equation modeling, results show that when one controls for social, human, and financial capital and for differences in health and type of child care, the infants of African American mothers would score higher than the infants of white mothers because of their precocious motor development. Social capital and low birth weight are found to be key mediators of the small black-white test score gap in infancy.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.298 · 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