Analyse of the Relation between the Coloured Progressive Matrices Test and the Cognitive Abilities Test Form-6 in the Preschool Period of Gifted Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diagnosis of preschool gifted children in Turkey has just come up in recent years. Therefore, there is a need for measurement tools that can be applied during the diagnosis phase of preschool gifted children. The aim of this study was to diagnose the relation between the non-verbal and culture-independent Colour Progressive Matrices Test that's frequently used in the international field during the preschool period and the Cognitive Ability Test Form-6, which is a group of tests that assess the cognitive abilities of children in different age groups including verbal, quantitative and nonverbal dimensions, and which is also used in the diagnosis of gifted children in the international arena, to contribute to the diagnosis of preschool gifted children. The sample of the study consisted of 125 children who attended nine preschool education institutions determined by the socio-economic level (low-middle-high) in the central district Efeler of the province Aydin. The mean age of the children is 4.9 and the standard deviation is .8. 49 of the children were girls (39.2%) and 76 were boys (60.8%). Colour Progressive Matrices Test and Cognitive Abilities Test Form-6 were implemented individually to the children. The study revealed that the tests had correlation, the verbal and quantitative dimensions of the Cognitive Abilities Test Form-6 were found to predict the nonverbal cognitive ability of the Coloured Progressive Matrices Test.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".