MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404528315 · doi:10.1080/21594937.2024.2425539

Children’s dynamic risk management – a comprehensive approach to children’s risk willingness, risk assessment, and risk handling

2024· article· en· W4404528315 on OpenAlex
Rasmus Kleppe, Ellen Beate Hansen Sandseter, Ole Johan Sando, Mariana Brussoni

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Play · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalLearning PartnershipUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsRisk managementRisk analysis (engineering)Risk assessmentActuarial scienceBusinessEnvironmental healthMedicineEconomicsFinanceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theoretical conceptualizations to facilitate understanding of how children manage risk-taking and risky play in their everyday lives are limited. We propose that there are emotional, cognitive and physical processes at work when a child faces a risk and that these processes can be termed risk willingness, risk assessment, and risk handling, respectively. In real-world risky situations, these processes overlap, interlink, and vary across individual and contextual factors. However, combined, they can be seen as a comprehensive expression of children’s risk management. The processes must also be understood within the cultural, social, and environmental contexts of the risk. We aim to unify these concepts within a comprehensive model that can be tested and applied in empirical studies and used to understand children’s risk-taking in general, as well as the implications of increasingly risk-deprived childhoods.

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)0.002
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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.320 · 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