MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590967948 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00301

Editorial: Motor Skills and Their Foundational Role for Perceptual, Social, and Cognitive Development

2017· editorial· en· W2590967948 on OpenAlexaff
Klaus Libertus, Petra Hauf

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2017
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionCognitionCognitive psychologySocial cognitionMotor skillCognitive scienceDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning occurs through dynamic interactions and exchanges with the physical environment and the social world.In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to the contributions of a healthy and well-functioning motor system for children's learning.Consequently, it seems evident that motor development is critical for children's understanding of the physical and social world.The current Research Topic examines this timely question and provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of the field on the role of motor skills during development.A total of 27 articles, covering applied and theoretical perspectives, are included in this Research Topic and examine the cascading influences of motor skills on perceptual, social, and cognitive processes.The contributions include both general overviews by review articles, presentation of novel findings in empirical articles, and opinion pieces that discuss future directions.Broadly speaking, the Research Topic covers three areas: First, articles that examine and describe the relation between motor skills and cognitive, perceptual, or social skills.Second, articles that discuss practical applications and implications by examining the role played by motor skills in developmental disorders.And third, articles that explore the direct effects of motor experiences on development across domains using training and enrichment paradigms.We will introduce and discuss each of these three areas in the following.

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)0.014
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0120.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.013

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations124
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207