MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170587927 · doi:10.7202/1014755ar

Gérer la tentation en situation d’apprentissage : comparaison de la réévaluation cognitive avec l’obéissance à un ordre

2013· article· fr· W2170587927 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Véronique Leroy, Jean-Baptiste Dayez, Moïra Mikolajczak, Jacques Grégoire

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesValuation (finance)PhilosophyPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quand un étudiant se retrouve en situation de tentation, ses parents/professeurs usent fréquemment de leur autorité pour le convaincre de persister dans son apprentissage. La présente étude propose une autre stratégie : la réévaluation cognitive. Elle consiste à changer la signification de la situation. Quatre-vingt-dix participants ont mémorisé des informations tout en étant tentés de regarder des images. Comparés à ceux qui n’avaient pas effectué de réévaluation ou qui avaient reçu l’injonction de bien faire, le groupe ayant réévalué la tâche (1) s’est moins laissé distraire, (2) a amélioré sa performance et (3) a attribué plus de valeur à la tâche.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.251 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducationSame topicChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207