MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020361927 · doi:10.1080/01443410.2020.1742875

Why are boys perceived as less prosocial than girls by their early childhood educators? The role of pragmatic skills in preschool and kindergarten children

2020· article· en· W3020361927 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

VenueEducational Psychology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsocial behaviorPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPragmatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the moderating role of pragmatic language skills in the relationship between perceived prosociality and gender among children in two different educational contexts and age groups (n = 108 children in childcare centres, age 4–5; n = 113 children in kindergarten, age 5–6). In line with many other studies, the results showed that boys were perceived by their ECEs and kindergarten teachers as being less prosocial than girls. In seeking to explain this gender gap, the moderating role played by perceived pragmatics in the prosociality of girls and boys as perceived by their ECEs and teachers was investigated and tended to be supported. These results are discussed in terms of gender stereotypes and their implications for promoting egalitarian relationships between boys and girls in educational contexts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.278 · 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