MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188868660 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2021.55005

How Does School Teaching Affect Adolescent Development: A Case Study based on the Thai TV Drama Hormone

2021· article· en· W3188868660 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hao Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaAffect (linguistics)PsychologyEmotional developmentAdolescent developmentDevelopmental psychologySocial changePolitical scienceArtLiteratureCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescent development has been a vital issue in education and numerous TV drama have had explored the problem in depth. In this paper, we study how does family affect adolescent development based on the case of the popular Thai TV drama Hormone. We find that sound and solid school teaching could effectively suppress violence, emotional impulsion, and could significantly improve the ability of self-control of adolescent. Based on what we have learnt, we propose that school and teachers should shoulder more responsibilities in adolescent development and parents should be involved in the educating process as well.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.337 · 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.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207