MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3049538487 · doi:10.51656/psycause.v8i2.20129

Liens entre la solitude et les types d'utilisation de Facebook

2019· article· fr· W3049538487 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mélissa Baillargeon, Anne-Hélène Harrisson, Joanie Mercier, Marie-Claude Richard

Bibliographic record

VenuePsycause revue scientifique étudiante de l École de psychologie de l Université Laval · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolitudeHumanitiesPsychologySocial psychologyPhilosophyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La solitude est un problème grandissant dans la société. Cette étude s’intéresse aux liens entre les types d’utilisation de Facebook, le sentiment de solitude et la perception de soutien social. 311 québécois de 18 à 29 ans utilisateurs de Facebook ont rempli un questionnaire informatique composé de l’Échelle de solitude de l’Université Laval (ÉSUL), du Passive and Active Use Measure (PAUM) et d’une version adaptée du Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS). L’hypothèse que l’utilisation passive de Facebook serait positivement liée au sentiment de solitude n’a pas été rejetée. Les hypothèses selon lesquelles il y aurait une association négative entre l’utilisation active de Facebook et le sentiment de solitude, que l’association négative entre l’utilisation active sociale de Facebook et le sentiment de solitude serait plus forte que celle entre l’utilisation active non sociale de Facebook et le sentiment de solitude et que la perception de soutien social expliquerait en partie la relation entre les types d’utilisation de Facebook et le sentiment de solitude ont été rejetées. La pertinence de promouvoir l’utilisation des réseaux sociaux comme moyen de contrer la solitude n’a pu être confirmée, toutefois la sensibilisation aux effets néfastes de l’utilisation passive de Facebook est une avenue intéressante.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsycause revue scientifique étudiante de l École de psychologie de l Université LavalSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207