MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410003366 · doi:10.1037/xlm0001488

The role of declarative and procedural learning in adolescent emergent reading.

2025· article· en· W4410003366 on OpenAlexaff
Joelle Hannon, Henry Brice, Benjamin D. Zinszer, Brice N'Guessan, Fabrice Tanoh, F. Sayako Earle, Kaja Kinga Jasińska

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersJacobs Family FoundationSociety for Research in Child Development
KeywordsPsychologyProcedural memoryDeclarative memoryReading (process)Cognitive psychologyProcedural knowledgeCognitionDevelopmental psychologyCognitive scienceLinguisticsNeuroscienceKnowledge base

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

= 88) in rural Cote d'Ivoire, aged 10-16. We examined performance on culturally appropriate declarative and procedural memory tasks, and found that declarative learning competes with procedural learning, such that stronger declarative memory negatively impacts the development of early reading skills. These findings are important for understanding the role of learning systems, and their interaction with age, in supporting literacy development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and CognitionSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207