MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096935301 · doi:10.1044/2020_lshss-20-00043

Clausal Density Between Ages 4 and 9 Years for the Edmonton Narrative Norms Instrument: Reference Data and Psychometric Properties

2020· article· en· W3096935301 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Speech and Hearing Services in Schools · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeReliability (semiconductor)PsychologyMean length of utteranceConcurrent validityCriterion validitySyntaxDevelopmental psychologyPsychometricsLanguage developmentLinguisticsNatural language processingComputer scienceConstruct validityInternal consistencyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study provided reference data and examined psychometric properties for clausal density (CD; i.e., number of clauses per utterance) in children between ages 4 and 9 years from the database of the Edmonton Narrative Norms Instrument (ENNI). Method Participants in the ENNI database included 300 children with typical language (TL) and 77 children with language impairment (LI) between the ages of 4;0 (years;months) and 9;11. Narrative samples were collected using a story generation task, in which children were asked to tell stories based on six picture sequences. CD was computed from the narrative samples. The split-half reliability, concurrent criterion validity, and diagnostic accuracy were evaluated for CD by age. Results CD scores increased significantly between ages 4 and 9 years in children with TL and those with LI. Children with TL produced higher CD scores than those with LI at each age level. In addition, the correlation coefficients for the split-half reliability and concurrent criterion validity of CD scores were all significant at each age level, with the magnitude ranging from small to large. The diagnostic accuracy of CD scores, as revealed by sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios, was poor. Conclusions The finding on diagnostic accuracy did not support the use of CD for identifying children with LI between ages 4 and 9 years. However, given the attested reliability and validity for CD, reference data of CD from the ENNI database can be used for evaluating children's difficulties with complex syntax and monitoring their change over time. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13172129.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.250 · 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