MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W321639447

Psychology: The Science of Behaviour

2002· article· en· W321639447 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. Adler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyLibrary scienceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NEIL R. CARLSON, WILLIAM BUSKIST, MICHAEL E. ENZLE, and C. DONALD HETH Psychology: The Science of Behaviour Toronto, ON: Pearson Education Canada Ltd., 2002, 701 pages (ISBN 0-13-0393606-6, $105.95, Hardcover) Reviewed by GEORGE ALDER With the publication of the second Canadian edition of Psychology: The Science of Behaviour, the already difficult decision facing introductory textbook selection committees in psychology departments across Canadian universities and colleges has become more complicated. This is the second edition of a Canadian adaptation of Neil Carlson and William Buskist's introductory text that, when it was last published in 1997, was in its fifth edition. Michael Enzle and C. Donald Heth of the University of Alberta have done an admirable job of Canadianizing the Carlson and Buskist text, providing a book in which Canadian sources and statistics are seamlessly integrated into the body of the text. Enzle and Heth have avoided many of the more common methods of Canadianizing texts (e.g., merely adding Canadian source materials to the end of already existing sections or by highlighting Canadian content by using specialized fonts), and in doing so have provided a text that deserves to be considered on its own merits, not merely on the basis of its Canadian content. Considering the depth and breadth of material covered, this text would be most appropriate for use in institutions where the instruction of introductory psychology extends across two semesters. The 635 pages of text (excluding prefaces, indexes, references, etc.) are divided into 18 chapters of just over 35 pages in average length. These numbers are comparable to those obtained in a recent analysis of full-- length introductory psychology textbooks that reported an average of 673.7 text pages divided into 17.62 chapters for an average of 38.61 pages per chapter (Griggs, Jackson, Christopher, & Marek, 1999). The breadth and depth of coverage in Carlson et al. is reflected not only by its length but also by the inclusion of separate chapters for the topics of sensation and perception which are in many texts combined into a single chapter, and with a separate chapter for language, which is often integrated into other more general topics (e.g., intelligence, development). One question that is often of paramount importance to committee members in selecting introductory texts is the text's level of difficulty. In their 1989 survey of psychology authors and editors, Griggs and Jackson found that introductory textbooks can be divided into three levels on the basis of their difficulty. A higher-level text is one that ...covers psychology in the greatest depth and breadth and is also closely tied to the experimental (Griggs & Jackson, 1989, p. 62), whereas a middle-level text has the breadth of coverage but not the depth, and a lower-level text represents yet another level down in depth of coverage with substantial in-chapter pedagogy (Griggs & Jackson, 1989). In his analysis of the difficulty of 37 introductory texts, Griggs (1999) rated the fifth edition of the Carlson and Buskist (1997) text as a Higher level text. Given that the Canadian edition of this text continues to be tied closely to the research literature and has retained the same basic structure and pedagogy, one could reasonably argue that the Canadian adaptation of the text would also receive a Higher level rating. Another factor that is often of major concern to those selecting introductory textbooks is the nature of the pedagogical features incorporated into the text. The Canadian edition of the Carlson et al. text has a number of different pedagogical aids, some of which I found more effective than others. Each chapter begins with a Chapter Outline that provides a survey of what the chapter discusses. I assume that many students will forego reading these since they do not really cover any additional material. However, I found the Opening Vignettes presented immediately after the chapter outlines to be considerably more compelling. …

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.014

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations117
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneSame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207