MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405232991 · doi:10.20355/jcie29602

Students With and Without Disabilities Using Social Media: Relationship Benefits and Implications for Education

2024· article· en· W4405232991 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christine Greenhow, Aisel Akhmedova, Jennifer Sutcliffe, Marisa H. Fisher, Connie Sung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contemporary Issues in Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial mediaSociologyComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pandemic in 2020 resulted in economic and social disruption of unprecedented scale. Social distancing — or physical distancing while in public spaces — was required, and social media usage spiked globally as people turned to these online spaces for information and connection. Today’s postsecondary students, in particular, are frequently immersed in social media; it can offer them social supports, such as a greater sense of belonging during times of transition and crisis, but also inherent risks, including cyberbullying and online harassment. Although many studies have examined the social connections or supports for learning that college students without disabilities experience by using social media, few studies have explored these phenomena among college students with disabilities, including neurodevelopmental disabilities such as anxiety disorders (e.g., social anxiety, autism, attention deficit disorder) that make socialization difficult for these young adults. It is important that educational research advances understanding of the socialization experiences of these students with disabilities because students’ sense of belonging and peer support is critical to their engagement and success in K-12 and postsecondary schooling.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Contemporary Issues in EducationSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207