MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095739867 · doi:10.29327/220687.3.1-6

O DESENVOLVIMENTO INFANTIL COMO TEMA DE ESTUDO À LUZ DA TEORIA PSICOGENÉTICA DE HENRI WALLON

2020· article· pt· W3095739867 on OpenAlexaff
Flávia Ferreira Barboza, Eduardo Cabral da Silva, Eliane Reis Neves da Silva, Léa Karla Carvalho Palmeira Barros, Rubiana de Omena Gusmão Moreno da Rocha, Fracyne Pedrosa da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Científica Evidência · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUÇÃO: Henri Wallon reconstruiu o modo de analisar o desenvolvimento humano e estudou suas características cognitivas, emocionais e motoras a partir da evolução psicológica das crianças.OBJETIVO: Identificar a importância dos aspectos da afetividade presentes nas relações de interação entre professor e aluno no processo de ensino-aprendizagem sob a perspectiva teórica walloniana.METODOLOGIA: utilizou-se como instrumento de pesquisa a abordagem qualitativa, através do método de revisão bibliográfica.RESULTADO E DISCUSSÃO: O estudo observacional infantil deve ser feito tomando a criança como ponto de partida, sem nada forçar, e a análise ser tomada como modalidade investigativa, pois as manifestações naturais de afetividade através dos comportamentos e das atitudes dentro das possibilidades em sala de aula, levam a compreender que o estudo da criança e suas fases a projetam à vida adulta.CONCLUSÃO: No momento em que indivíduos se interagem e se identificam, com base em necessidades comuns em prol do aprendizado no crescimento infantil, os laços afetivos-emocionais coexistem no dia a dia do ambiente escolar.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRevista Científica EvidênciaSame topicPsychology and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207