Analyzing the relationship between bimanual performance on the Wathand Cabinet Test and a bimanual coordination beading task in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The WatHand Cabinet Test (WHCT) (Bryden, Roy & Spence, 2007) has been significantly correlated with the Waterloo Handedness Questionnaire (Bryden, 1977) and the Annett Pegboard (Annett, 1985) as a reliable behavioural-based measure of hand preference used to observe and quantify hand preference in individuals of all ages. The current study was performed to analyze the relationship between sub-scores of bimanual performance on the WHCT and a Bimanual Coordination Beading Task (Parlow & Harris, 2005). 45 right-handed children (3-8 years old) participated in this study. Preliminary analysis revealed 3-4 year olds use either hand to open the cabinet door, but the preferred hand to pick up the candy dispenser; 5-6 year olds use their non-preferred hand to open the cabinet door, but the preferred hand to pick up the candy dispenser; 7-8 year olds were equally as likely to use the right or left hand for both components of the task. Observing trends in the beading task, 3-4 year olds were observed using the preferred and non-preferred hands equally as often for threading and beading; where 5 to 8 year olds used their preferred hand for threading and non-preferred hand for beading. Preliminary findings suggest that with age, children are more likely to use their preferred hand for threading; however, are variable when lifting a cabinet door and picking up a candy dispenser. Future work will include a larger sample size to further analyze relationships at a quantitative level. Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of for funding this project.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".