MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240569225 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-12115

Children's Use of Trait Information in Their Intention Ascription and Moral Judgments of Others

2017· dissertation· en· W4240569225 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Gardiner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraitAscriptionPsychologySocial psychologyNiceCharacter (mathematics)AttributionDevelopmental psychologyEpistemologyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research into young children's moral reasoning typically employs stories that utilize characters with no background information. The current study addressed this limitation by examining 4-and 5-year-old children's use of trait information in their ascriptions of intention and moral judgments of characters who have identical, neutral intentions who produce either a positive or negative outcome. Children in the Trait-Present conditions heard stories in which a character was described with a trait (either nice or mean) along with three behavioural examples that are consistent with the trait. In order to determine the effect of providing trait information, children in the Trait-Absent condition were presented with the same stories, but without trait information. Results

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)0.000
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 score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.281
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

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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207