MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Parents' Role on the Motivation and Achievement of Gifted Children with Special Needs: A Review

2023· review· en· W4321455942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alatawi Marwan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyAffect (linguistics)Reading (process)Need for achievementSpecial needs

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Some unusual children experience prolonged distracted stress or risk factors that prevent them from maximizing their potential without specific treatment or support. Therefore, it appears that studying parental motivation and its impact on gifted children is very important. Objectives: The primary goal of this paper is to determine the impact of parental involvement on the development and motivation—of gifted children with special needs education (double exceptional). The paper also indicates the impact of parental involvement on children's educational outcomes. Results: The findings of this paper indicate that parental involvement significantly influences the motivation of children with special needs in terms of their achievement in the arts and how much they affect the academic achievement of double-exceptional students related to various aspects of science and life. Conclusion: As we found that parents are the initiators of double-differentiation in their children, future studies could explore knowledge and awareness of double-differentiation in parents. But our study reading how parents came to know their children twice unusually is essential as a first step in assessing parental thinking.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and TreatmentSame topicChild Development and EducationFrench-language works237,207