MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221128200 · doi:10.1002/9781119679028.ch19

Children's Social Development within the Context of Early Childhood Education and Care Experiences

2022· other· en· W4221128200 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda A. White, Anika Ganness, Michal Perlman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarly childhood educationEarly childhoodContext (archaeology)Child careQuality (philosophy)PsychologyChild developmentDevelopmental psychologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceSociologyGeographyNursingEconomicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Families access Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) settings as a way to support maternal employment as well as to support children's development. Drawing on Bronfenbrenner's ecological system theory, this chapter first reviews the literature that documents the potential social and emotional effects of exposure to quality ECEC services. Specifically, it examines research about the delivery of ECEC services (for example, poor pay leading to high rates of staff turnover) that may explain findings in the research about associations between ECEC quality and child outcomes. Baker et al. found that increased ECEC had little effect on child development, with few or insignificant changes to children's temperament, motor and social development in response to ECEC programming. The chapter also examines policy features in Anglo-American countries such as Canada and the United States in particular that might account for the lack of association of ECEC programs and positive child-development outcomes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207