MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380550520 · doi:10.1044/2023_lshss-22-00091

The Effect of Age and Task Complexity on the Microstructure of Child Arabic Narratives

2023· article· en· W4380550520 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abdessatar Mahfoudhi, Fauzia Abdalla, Nailah Al-Sulaihim

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Speech and Hearing Services in Schools · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLexical diversityNarrativePsychologyLinguisticsStorytellingTask (project management)Developmental psychologyVocabulary

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study examines the development of narrative microstructure elements of productivity, lexical diversity, and syntactic complexity in the oral story production of preschool- and school-age Kuwaiti Arabic-speaking children. It also explores the effects of story task complexity on the target microstructural features. METHOD: This study employed a cross-sectional research design and enrolled 96 monolingual speakers of Kuwaiti Arabic. Four groups of children aged 4;0-7;11 (years;months) were randomly recruited from public schools across Kuwait. The groups consisted of 22 four-year-olds (Kindergarten 1), 24 five-year-olds (Kindergarten 2), 25 six-year-olds (Grade 1), and 25 seven-year-olds (Grade 2). Two sets of sequential pictures from the Edmonton Narrative Norms Instrument were used to elicit storytelling from all participants: a one-episode story and a more complex three-episode story. RESULTS: The children's stories were analyzed to determine if there were differences in narrative microstructure as a function of age and task complexity. The data indicated that productivity, lexical diversity, and syntactic structures increased with task complexity. The length of communication units, the average mean length of the three longest utterances, and the amount and variety of words in the children's productions were all significantly larger in the more complex story. Only one syntactic structure showed age as well as task effects. CONCLUSION: Clinical recommendations include adapting the coding scheme to fit Arabic data, using the more complex narrative alone for microstructure analysis, and calculating only a few measures for productivity and syntactic complexity to save time.

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 score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.294
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 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage Speech and Hearing Services in SchoolsSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207