MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610651657 · doi:10.1002/sce.21277

Temporality of Emotion: Antecedent and Successive Variants of Frustration When Learning Chemistry

2017· article· en· W2610651657 on OpenAlexaff
Donna King, Stephen M. Ritchie, Maryam Sandhu, Senka Henderson, Ben Boland

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsVictoria Park
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsTemporalityFrustrationPsychologyScience educationMathematics educationChemistryDevelopmental psychologyEpistemologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Learning science in the middle years can be an emotional experience. In this study, we explored ninth‐grade students’ discrete emotions expressed during science activities in a 9‐week unit on chemistry. Individual student's emotions were analyzed through multiple data sources including classroom videos, interviews, and emotions diaries completed at the end of each lesson. Results from three representative students are presented as cases within a case study. Using a theoretical perspective drawn from theories of emotions founded in sociology, three assertions emerged. First, students experienced frustration when learning new chemistry concepts. Second, frustration was resolved through student–student and teacher–student interactions. Third, frustration was transformed when students were afforded time to revisit new concepts. Furthermore, the teacher's identification of students’ emotions enabled differentiation of learning through individualized interactions. Finally, we explain how the temporality of emotions emerged as an important phenomenon and suggest an elaboration to Turner's theorization of emotions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations39
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience EducationSame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207