MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389895654 · doi:10.32584/jpi.v6i2.1160

Intensitas Penggunaan Gadget dengan Perkembangan Sosial pada Anak Usia Dini (4-6 Tahun)

2022· article· id· W4389895654 on OpenAlexaff
Tika Kartika, Ade Iwan Mutiudin, Lina Marlina

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Perawat Indonesia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGadgetHumanitiesPsychologyArtMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penggunaan gadget melebihi batas waktu yang disarankan pada anak dapat menyebabkan sebuah ketergantungan, ketika dalam menggunakan gadget terlalu lama mengakibatkan anak kurang berinteraksi dan kurang beradaptasi yang nantinya akan menghambat perkembangan sosial. Tujuan penelitian untuk mengetahui hubungan intensitas penggunaan gadget dengan perkembangan sosial pada anak usia dini (4-6 tahun). Metode penelitian ini adalah deskriftif analitik korelasional dengan pendekatan cross sectional. Tekhnik pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah data kuantitatif dengan istrumen penelitian melalui pengisian kuisioner. Responden dalam penelitian ini sebanyak 35 orang melalui teknik pengambilan sampel total sampling. Analisa data menggunakan metode uji Spearman Rho. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa sebagian besar sekitar 18 anak (51,4%) intensitas penggunaan gadget tinggi dengan perkembangan sosial yang kurang sebanyak 16 anak (45,7%). Hasil analisis didapatkan hubungan yang signifikan antara intensitas penggunaan gadget dengan perkembangan sosial pada anak usia dini (4-6 tahun) dengan nilai p value 0,000 yang lebih kecil daripada nilai α : 0,05 (p<0,05). Berdasarkan penelitian ini erat hubungannya antara intensitas penggunaan gadget dengan perkembangan sosial, diharapkan orangtua mampu mengontrol penggunaan gadget pada anak dengan memberikan batasan waktu dan mengalihkan kebiasaan anak dengan membiarkan anak beradaptasi dengan lingkungannya.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Perawat IndonesiaSame topicEducational Methods and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207