MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944450435 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v9n3p279

Does English Help You Accomplish More? Exploring the Instrumentality of English Learning in East and Southeast Asia

2019· article· en· W2944450435 on OpenAlex
Huiyu Zhang

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployee Welfare and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsChinaSoutheast asiaSample (material)East AsiaGlobalizationPsychologyDemographic economicsPolitical scienceSociologyEconomicsLawEthnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study empirically investigates the relationship between English proficiency and personal accomplishment in East and Southeast Asia. With the database of AsiaBarometer Survey 2006 and 2007, 15082 questionnaire respondents from China, Hong Kong of China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Taiwan of China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines and Thailand formed the sample. We present the following findings with correlation and regression analysis: a) English proficiency positively influences personal accomplishment; b) the focal relationship is partly mediated by income, career and quality of life; and c) the focal relationship is positively moderated by international involvement. Such findings disclose and confirm the instrumentality of English learning in globalization. Theoretical and practical implications of the results 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)0.041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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