MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190947081 · doi:10.7202/1078918ar

Liens direct et indirect entre les souvenirs d’échecs et le développement de symptÔmes dépressifs chez les adolescents

2021· article· fr· W3190947081 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Élizabeth Parent-Taillon, Thérèse Bouffard, Christine Maltais

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de psychologie · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude propose que le biais de mémoire vers les souvenirs d’échecs chez des préadolescents contribue au développement d’un biais négatif d’auto-évaluation et à l’anxiété d’évaluation, qui médiatisent la relation entre le biais de mémoire et les symptômes dépressifs chez des adolescents. 826 élèves (423 filles) entre 10 et 15 ans, ont répondu à des questionnaires autorapportés en trois temps de mesure sur quatre ans. Testés avec l’analyse de médiation (Mplus), les résultats du modèle testé suggèrent que l’effet du biais de mémoire vers les souvenirs d’échecs sur le développement des symptômes dépressifs, est partiellement indirect et médiatisé par le biais d’auto-évaluation négatif et l’anxiété d’évaluation. Sachant le rôle des biais vers des souvenirs d’échecs, de l’anxiété d’évaluation et du biais négatif d’auto-évaluation dans la présence de symptômes dépressifs, ces aspects pourraient être pris considération dans les interventions faites avec des jeunes présentant de tels symptômes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de psychologieSame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207