MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026802702 · doi:10.1080/21683603.2020.1760977

Effectiveness of a SEL/mindfulness program on Northern Ugandan children

2020· article· en· W3026802702 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Kyle Matsuba, Kimberly A. Schonert‐Reichl, Theresa McElroy, Anne Katahoire

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of School & Educational Psychology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaKwantlen Polytechnic University
FundersKwantlen Polytechnic University
KeywordsMindfulnessPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research was designed to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of a social and emotional learning (SEL) mindfulness-based school program (MindUp) for children in post-conflict Northern Uganda. In study one, we culturally adapted and implemented MindUp with 5th and 6th graders. Over a two-year period, significant decreases in children’s self-reported depressive symptoms and increases in empathic concern were found. In a second, quasi-experimental study, we compared 5th and 6th graders from a school in which MindUp was implemented to children in a similar school without the program. MindUp children reported significant decreases in anger, hostility, and rejection; were reported by their teachers to be higher in positive affect and empathic behaviors; and showed greater increases in academic grades over the duration of the program in contrast to children who did not receive MindUp. These results are discussed with regard to the educational implications of the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing MindUp in other schools within Uganda and beyond.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.382 · 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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of School & Educational PsychologySame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207