MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891490223 · doi:10.1111/sode.12340

Ability emotional intelligence and children’s behaviour in the playground

2018· article· en· W2891490223 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

VenueSocial Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersEconomic and Social Research Council
KeywordsPsychologyAggressionDevelopmental psychologyEarly childhood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We explored whether emotion understanding promotes positive social functioning in childhood using the ability emotional intelligence (AEI) framework, which defines emotion understanding more broadly than is common in developmental science. The prospective study included children ages 9–11 years who completed a measure of AEI at the start of the school year, and whose playground interactions were observed for one full year. Findings showed that, among girls, low AEI was associated with higher levels of direct aggressive behaviour in the playground; boys and girls high or low in AEI were more likely than their peers to watch others during playground social interactions. Further, higher AEI was associated with indirect aggression in school, suggesting higher AEI during childhood may be associated with the developmental transition from direct to indirect forms of aggression. The implications of the findings for school practice in relation to the teaching of emotion understanding are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.299 · 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