A comparison of Spanish language samples elicited by the investigator in the clinic and by the mothers in the home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary purpose of the present study was to compare the quality of spontaneous language samples elicited from twelve low socioeconomic, normally developing, migrant Spanish-speaking subjects by their mothers in the home and by this investigator in the clinic. The subjects ranged in age from three years, one month to six years, nine months. The essential question sought to determine if the comparison of language samples elicited in the home by the mothers and the language samples. elicited in the clinic by the investigator yielded significant differences in syntactical language development as measured by the Developmental Assessment of Spanish Grammar (DASG) (Toronto, 1972, 1976). Comparison of DASG total scores and DASG individual category scores was made between the home and the clinic samples. Mean scores were determined for the subjects' performances in each setting. Differences between the means of the different results were analyzed utilizing a t-test. In addition, t-test analysis was conducted to determine the significance level of DASG scores when compared by age and sex in the clinic and in the home, and by order of examination. The results of the present study appear to support findings of studies conducted with English-speaking subjects. Although the speech-language clinician may elicit greater amounts of speech, there is a slight difference in favor of the quality of the language samples elicited by the mother in the home. This difference, however, is not statistically significant and does not invalidate those samples taken in the clinic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".