MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025684754 · doi:10.7202/1069765ar

THE EFFECTS OF ANIMAL-ASSISTED ACTIVITIES (AAA) ON THE WELL-BEING OF MINORITY STUDENTS IN GERMANY

2020· article· en· W3025684754 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Laura Sokal, Anna Kahl

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité LavalUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthClubPsychologyWell-beingCalmnessPerceptionClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineGerontologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global increases in mental illness in children and youth have precipitated a wide range of therapies to address this concern. An alternative to this reactive approach is based on models of mental wellness that enhance children’s and youths’ perceptions of well-being and health. The current project examined the effects of a universal animal-assisted activity (AAA) program on a group of minority students who attended a boarding school in Germany. The intent of the current study was to determine whether the duration and types of AAA the students experienced were associated with higher levels of perceived mental well-being. Short-term gains in calmness were demonstrated under some AAA conditions, and long-term gains in well-being resulted from minority children’s participation in rabbit club.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207