RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARAMETERS OF ADOLESCENT OCHULOGRAPHY WITH THE PECULIARITY OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS WHEN READING INSTRUCTIONS ON THE INTERNET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Чтение инструкции - необходимая составляющая процесса понимания задачи, поставленной перед учащимся. Её значимость повышается при расширении самостоятельности в процессе обучения и повышении ответственности за него. Однако чтение инструкции обычно рассматривается с точки зрения того, как сконструировать её, а не с точки зрения человека, её читающего. Психологическим конструктом, позволяющим эффективно понимать инструкцию, можно считать когнитивный контроль, задача которого - приводить поведение в соответствие текущим задачам. Когнитивный контроль является частью исполнительных функций, и включает рабочую память и тормозный контроль. Цель исследования: изучить связь параметров окулографии подростков с особенностью исполнительных функций при чтении инструкции в интернете. Для оценки параметров окулографии использовался канадский айтрекер Gazepoint GP3 HD. Для оценки параметров рабочей памяти была использована компьютеризированная методика (Разумникова, Николаева, 2019), предназначенная для запоминания зрительных объектов, представленных на экране компьютера. В качестве испытуемых были 45 подростков (средний возраст 13,7±2,1 лет); из них 18 девочек и 27 мальчиков. Был проведён регрессионный анализ. Качество чтения инструкции в интернете в полной мере опирается на уровень сформированности исполнительных функций подростка: чем выше тормозные процессы и менее выражен в рабочей памяти механизм забывания как следствие воспроизведения, тем чаще человек фиксируется на тексте, фиксации осуществляются дольше, и тем реже он возвращается к уже прочитанному тексту. К Abstract. Reading the instructions is a necessary part of the process of understanding the task assigned to the student. Its importance increases with the expansion of independence in the learning process and increased responsibility for it. However, reading an instruction is usually viewed from the perspective of how to construct it, not from the perspective of the person reading it. A psychological construct that allows you to effectively understand instructions is cognitive control, the task of which is to bring behavior in line with current tasks. Cognitive control is part of executive function and includes working memory and inhibitory control. Purpose of the study: to study the relationship between the parameters of oculography in adolescents and the peculiarity of executive functions when reading instructions on the Internet. To assess the oculography parameters, we used the Canadian Gazepoint GP3 HD eye tracker. To assess the parameters of working memory, a computerized technique was used (Razumnikova, Nikolaeva, 2019) designed to memorize visual objects presented on a computer screen. The subjects were 45 adolescents (mean age 13.7 ± 2.1 years); 18 of them are girls and 27 are boys. Regression analysis was performed. The quality of reading instructions on the Internet fully relies on the level of formation of the adolescent's executive functions: the higher the inhibitory processes and the less pronounced in the working memory the forgetting mechanism as a result of reproduction, the more often a person is fixed on the text, fixations take longer, and the less often he returns to the already the text read.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".