Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal;"> </p><p>The aim of this study is evaluating aggression behaviors of children with hearing impairment and comparing them with their peers who do not have any kind of hearing problems. For this purpose, 81 children with hearing impairment and 80 children with no hearing problems between the ages of 10-17 years were included in the study (a total of 161 children). The data of the study were obtained by Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire and the General Information Form. According to the results of this study, the total aggressiveness varies depending on age and hearing children show less aggressive behaviors as they get older; however, in children with hearing impairment, no difference was observed in their aggressive behaviors depending on their ages; gender creates a difference in total aggression behaviors in both children groups with and without hearing impairment and boys show more aggression behaviors compared to girls; children, who received pre-school education, with impairment show more aggressive behaviors, the existence of another hearing impairment family member increases the physical and indirect aggression behaviors of children with hearing impairment.</p><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 10pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US;" lang="EN-US"><br /></span></p>
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".