MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322503354 · doi:10.1111/lit.12315

The roots of reading for pleasure: Recollections of reading and current habits

2023· article· en· W4322503354 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLiteracy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReading (process)PleasurePsychologyLiteracyDevelopmental psychologyTest (biology)PopulationPedagogyLinguisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Children's early literacy experiences are critical, yet it remains unclear whether memories of early reading instruction continue to be associated with reading habits into adulthood. We examined the association between recollections of reading experiences and present‐day reading habits in an adult population. University students responded in writing to three open‐ended prompts asking about their memories of reading during early childhood, elementary school and high school. They also completed two questionnaires inquiring about reading enjoyment and frequency in elementary school and high school. For the concurrent measures of reading, participants described their current reading habits in an open‐ended prompt and completed an author recognition test. Results showed positive links between favourable memories of reading during elementary and high school years and present‐day reading habits. Conversely, unfavourable memories during high school were associated with unenthusiastic present‐day reading habits. We found that reading instruction in school forms long‐lasting memories, and these memories are linked in meaningful ways with print exposure during adulthood.

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.325 · 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