MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408239337 · doi:10.3389/978-2-8325-6092-1

Early Media Exposure

2025· book· en· W4408239337 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers research topics · 2025
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Studies and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMinistry of Māori DevelopmentNational Institutes of HealthUniversität PaderbornEesti TeadusagentuurUniversity of AucklandCanterbury Medical Research FoundationNational Institute of Nursing ResearchErnst Göhner Stiftung
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the foundational development that occurs during early childhood, exposure to digital media has long been a topic of research interest and associated public concern. Media use has become an integral part of family life and meets many family needs. Research has struggled to keep pace with the changing use of technology and the impact that this has on early childhood development. To meet this challenge, we encourage submissions to this editorial initiative of particular relevance, led by Prof Rachel Barr, Dr Tiffany Munzer and Prof Mark Nielsen, that are at the cutting edge of investigation into early media exposure. The goal of this Research Topic is to shed light on the progress made during the past decade within the broad and multidisciplinary field of early media exposure and to draw attention to future challenges associated with this to provide a thorough overview of the status of the field. This collection will inspire, inform and provide direction and guidance.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.010

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers research topicsSame topicMedia Studies and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207