MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531249859 · doi:10.1080/00221325.2016.1240000

G. Stanley Hall, Child Study, and the American Public

2016· article· en· W2531249859 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jacy L. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Genetic Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaJohnson and Johnson
KeywordsNewspaperRelevance (law)PersonaPsychologyLecture hallMedia studiesSocial scienceSociologyPolitical scienceLawHistoryHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the final decades of the 19th century psychologist Granville Stanley Hall was among the most prominent pedagogical experts in the nation. The author explores Hall's carefully crafted persona as an educational expert, and his engagements with the American public, from 1880 to 1900, arguably the height of his influence. Drawing from accounts of Hall's lecture circuit in the popular press, a map of his talks across the nation is constructed to assess the geographic scope of his influence. These talks to educators on the psychology underlying childhood and pedagogy, and his views and research on child life more generally, were regularly discussed in newspapers and popular periodicals. The venues in which Hall's ideas were disseminated, discussed, and in some cases, dismissed are described. His efforts to mobilize popular support for, and assistance with, his research endeavors in child study are also discussed. Such efforts were controversial both within the burgeoning field of psychology and among the public. Through his various involvements in pedagogy, and concerted efforts to engage with the American public, Hall helped establish psychology's relevance to parenting and educational practices.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.332 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Genetic PsychologySame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207