MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161256890 · doi:10.1080/01650250344000046

Compliance in Chinese and Canadian toddlers: A cross-cultural study

2003· article· en· W2161256890 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)PsychologySituational ethicsDevelopmental psychologyPunishment (psychology)Observational studyChinaCultural diversityChild rearingParenting stylesSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observational data concerning children’s compliance were collected from samples of 2-year-olds in PR China and Canada. Information on child-rearing attitudes was obtained from mothers. It was found that Chinese toddlers had higher scores on voluntary committed compliance than their Canadian counterparts. In contrast, Canadian toddlers had higher scores on externally imposed or situational compliance and overt protest than Chinese toddlers. Girls displayed more committed compliance than boys in both samples. Maternal warmth and induction were positively associated with committed compliance in Chinese toddlers, and maternal induction was positively associated with situational compliance in Canadian toddlers. Maternal punishment orientation was negatively associated with committed compliance and positively associated with situational control in Chinese toddlers, but not in Canadian toddlers. The results might indicate specific cultural “meanings” of different forms of child compliance.

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)0.000
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.343 · 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