MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409331128 · doi:10.1111/cdep.12546

Possibility Judgments in Childhood: Is Uncertainty Monitoring the Missing Link?

2025· article· en· W4409331128 on OpenAlex
Samuel Ronfard, Brandon W. Goulding, Jonathan D. Lane

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Development Perspectives · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyLink (geometry)Cognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Unlike adults, young children think that many weird and unlikely events are impossible. Existing theories have argued that this developmental shift is driven primarily by age-related changes in knowledge as well as an increasing ability to reflect on one's modal intuitions. However, this intuition + reflection model fails to explain when and why children and adults engage in reflection. In this article, we review research on the development of modal intuitions, and we present a framework for thinking about development that connects intuition and reflection by positing that confidence in one's intuitions plays a key role in explaining age-related and individual differences in children's judgments of possibility.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.323 · 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