MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042161516 · doi:10.18023/ijece.2020.26.1.003

어머니와 조부모의 자율성 지지 및 자율성 통제 양육이 유아의 기본심리욕구에 미치는 영향

2020· article· ko· W3042161516 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Youjin Jang

Bibliographic record

VenueEarly childhood education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Technology and Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

기존의 기본심리욕구(BPN)에 대한 연구는 성인과 청소년을 대상으로 실시되었다. 본 연구의 목적은 한국 어린이의 BPN을 측정하는 발달적으로 적절한 방법을 모색하고, 어머니와 조부모의 양육이 유아의 BPN에 미치는 영향을 파악하기 위해 수행되었다. 서울지역 4개 유치원에서 모집한 원아 213명(여 51.64%)이 연구에 참여하였다. 데이터는 구조 방정식 모델링 및 부트스트래핑으로 분석하였다. 연구대상 유아의 어머니들은 자신이 높은 수준의 자율성 지지 양육을 한다고 지각하였으나, 이 연구의 유아들은 유능성과 관계성에 대한 욕구는 높았던 반면 자율성 욕구는 낮았다. 조부모의 자율성 지지 양육은 유아의 BPN에 영향을 미치지 않은 반면, 조부모의 자율성 통제 양육은 어머니의 자율성 통제 양육을 통해 자녀의 BPN에 부정적인 영향을 미쳤다.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarly childhood educationSame topicMilitary Technology and StrategiesFrench-language works237,207