Stereotypical Image of Scientists:Research Advance and its Implications
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children are the potential human resources for developing science and technology in the future.How children perceive scientists influence their interests and self-efficacy in science learning and also motivate them to pursue scientific-related careers in the future.The empirical studies show that the stereotypical images of scientists held by children are mediated by the socio-cultural context.Therefore,these images vary in different cultural situations.Role modeling and scientific career information sharing provide the possibility to promote the humane,positive and accessible image of scientists.Considering the contemporary science educational context in China,four principles are worthy to be considered in diminishing negative scientist images.First,scientific research is expected to intertwine with the public by communication rather than being preserved in the ivory tower.Second,the research products of science education should be applied in practical teaching and learning processes.Then,the minority group needs to be engaged in the educational context.Lastly,the role of social science in scientific area needs to be weighed as much as natural science.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it