MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761430135 · doi:10.1002/icd.2063

Responses to interview questions: A cross‐linguistic study of acquiescence tendency

2017· article· en· W2761430135 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInfant and Child Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcquiescencePsychologySocial psychologyTest (biology)LinguisticsDevelopmental psychologyPersianPhenomenonObject (grammar)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent theoretical accounts have assumed that children display an acquiescence tendency when answering yes–no questions. The present cross‐linguistic study aimed to test this account via examination of the responses of children to various yes–no questions about 6 familiar and unfamiliar objects. The impacts of age and linguistic background on children's response tendencies were also investigated. The participants were 3 groups of 2‐ to 5‐year‐old children, including 98 Persian, 78 Kurdish, and 43 English speaking children. Results revealed that younger children, regardless of their linguistic background, demonstrate an acquiescence tendency. The findings suggest that acquiescence tendency is a universal phenomenon. However, children's level of acquiescence declines as age increases. Implications regarding the use of yes–no questions with children are discussed. Highlights The effects of age, object familiarity and language on children's responses to yes‐no questions were examined. Regardless of their language, all children displayed an acquiescence tendency, but younger children exhibited a stronger tendency. Children's acquiescence tendency is a universal phenomenon.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.285 · 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