Justesse et actualité de la théorie de Kurt Lewin sur le développement de l’adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il y a déjà quarante ans, Kurt Lewin, par le biais de la théorie du champ, proposait une façon nouvelle de concevoir le développement de l’adolescence en vue de mieux comprendre les difficultés typiques de cette période. Lewin fait également appel au concept de marginalité pour mieux saisir la situation malaisée de ceux qui vivent cette période de transition et les caractéristiques psychologiques qui surgissent pendant cette étape de l’existence. Cependant, Lewin n’a pas montré de façon empirique que les jeunes répondaient effectivement à la vision qu’il entretenait à leur endroit. La présente étude tente de vérifier de façon expérimentale la justesse et l’actualité de la théorie de Lewin sur l’adolescence, en tenant compte des variables du sexe et de l’âge des adolescents et des adolescentes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".