Movement imagery ability in boys and girls 7 to 12 years old
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Movement imagery is the ability to mentally perform an action without physically performing the movement. Several self-report questionnaires have been developed to assess movement imagery ability in adults (e.g. Movement Imagery Questionnaire Revised [MIQ-R]). There is a dearth of movement imagery questionnaires developed for use with children. To address this problem, the MIQ-3, an updated version of the MIQ-R, was adapted for use with children, using cognitive interviewing (MIQ-C).The purpose of this presentation is to describe the process undertaken for the development of the MIQ-C and report the findings regarding movement imagery abilities in children 7-12 years. Adaptation for children resulted in simplified instructions, including the use of pictures. The final version of the MIQ-C was administered to 202 children (Boys: M age = 9; Girls: M age = 9.27) which required them to physically perform specific movements prior to imaging each movement. They were asked to rate the difficulty of imaging the movements on a 7pt Likert scale from an internal or external visual perspective, or kinesthetically. The main effects for Age and Gender were not significant (p's >.05); however, results revealed imaging movements kinesthetically (M=4.87) is significantly more difficult for children than imaging from either an internal (M=5.26) or external (M=5.47) visual modality (p
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".