Momentary clumsiness and attention: Everyday interactions (and risks) in the world
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Typically, explorations into risk-taking involve the conscious undertaking of actions that are potentially harmful. Rarely considered in such risk-taking contexts, however, are everyday, innocuous behaviors that nevertheless have the potential to cause some level of harm to actors; such behaviors could be considered as lying on a continuum of risky activity. The current study explored individual and developmental differences in one such category of behavior, entitled "momentary clumsiness". Momentary clumsiness refers to a tendency to perform movements involving non-optimal motor control, such as knocking over a glass of liquid or tripping while walking up stairs. This project explored the link between such behaviors and attentional factors. Specifically, twenty participants in three age groups (7- and 8-year-olds, 11- and 12-year-olds, and young adults) completed the experiment in 2 testing sessions. Momentary clumsiness was assessed by a 2-week daily phone interview, and was correlated with Stroop performance. The incidence of momentary clumsiness remained steady with age and was not related to motor ability or anthropometric measures. A high incidence of momentary clumsy behaviors was associated with a narrow focus of attention, and specifically, the tendency to ignore irrelevant and distracting stimuli. These findings are interpreted with respect to the relation between action and attentional focus, and provide a basis for extending our conceptualizations of injury proneness and risk-taking into a continuum of behaviors, varying in their degree of riskiness.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".