MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288983238 · doi:10.26034/tranel.2019.2992

Description du développement de microstructures dans des récits spontanés d’une dyade plurilingue d’enfants fréquentant un centre de la petite enfance québécois

2019· article· en· W4288983238 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nancy A. Allen

Bibliographic record

VenueTravaux neuchâtelois de linguistique · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeDyadPsychologyNonverbal communicationDevelopmental psychologyFirst languageLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes the development of oral (verbal and non verbal) microstructures present in the spontaneous narratives of a plurilingual dyad. This dyad is composed of a French-speaking and a Spanish-speaking child. The first child is 38 months old at the first time of data collection and 43 months at the second time, 5 months later. The second child is aged 40 months at the first collection time and 45 at the second. We analyze their spontaneous narratives in regards to their smallest components, in other words, the microstructures, as well as in terms of the amount of microstructures observed in their propositions. We also analyze their spontaneous narrative in terms of complexity, especially with regard to the length and richness of their propositions through their spontaneous narratives. Our results show non-significant differences in the use of verbal and nonverbal language of these children. However, mother tongue seems to have an impact on language productivity in their spontaneous narratives, to the detriment of language complexity.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTravaux neuchâtelois de linguistiqueSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207