MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2733995685 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v7n2p51

Parents’ Social Validity Appraisals of Early Childhood Intervention Practice Guides

2017· article· en· W2733995685 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carl J. Dunst

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Education
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologyTest (biology)Early childhood interventionDevelopmental psychologyField (mathematics)Clinical psychologyApplied psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Findings from three field-tests of parents’ ratings of early childhood intervention practice guides are reported. Results from the first field-test were used to inform changes to the practice guides in the second field-test, and results from the second field-test were used to inform changes to the practice guides in the third field-test. Parents’ judgments of the practice guide designs and their social validity appraisals of the practice guide intervention activities and child outcomes were correlated with parent-informed improvements in the intervention materials. The results add to the knowledge base in terms of how parent-informed improvements to the practice guides are related to product design judgments and the social validity appraisals of the importance and acceptability of early childhood intervention materials.

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)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.232
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.232
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.350 · 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207