MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791799202 · doi:10.26034/tranel.2017.2881

Interactions parent-enfant et développement langagier d'enfants négligés âgés de 3,5 ans

2017· article· en· W2791799202 on OpenAlexaff
Audette Sylvestre, Mélissa Di Sante, Caroline Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueTravaux neuchâtelois de linguistique · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeglectDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyContext (archaeology)Affect (linguistics)Child neglectLanguage developmentChild abusePoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicineGeographyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Child neglect is a parent's failure to respond to his child's fundamental needs. In this context, language development is particularly vulnerable as it depends on frequent and sensitive parent-child interactions. After having established the prevalence of language delays among neglected children, this study aims to compare dimensions of parent-child interactions in neglectful and non-neglectful dyads and to identify interactional dimensions associated with the language skills of neglected children. Fifteen neglected and 61 nonneglected children aged 3.5 years and their parents participated in the study. Results show that neglected children present significant delays in all language measures. Neglectful parents displayed less responsiveness and less positive affect toward their child than nonneglectful parents. Clinical and research implications conclude this paper.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.388 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTravaux neuchâtelois de linguistiqueSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207