MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411656748 · doi:10.51847/8nwdhu4i8i

10.51847/8nwdhu4i8I

2000· article· en· W4411656748 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcementSocial skillsPsychologyMathematics educationPedagogyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of social story with positive reinforcement in increasing the social skills of kindergarten student.Social story with positive reinforcement is the reading of a story that is specifically made to help a child to handle specific social situation that the child encounter, with giving positive reinforcement aimed to increase the targeted behavior.This study used a single case design method with one respondent chosen by purposive sampling technique based on criteria given.The pre-test and post test evaluation of social skills are using Social Skill Improvement System-Rating Scale by Gresham & Elliot (2008).The evaluation of this study is also done by observing the frequency of targeted behavior before, during and after the intervention.The observation is done by event recording technique.The implementation of Social Story with positive reinforcement's effectiveness is marked by the increasing post test scores of Social Skill Improvement System-Rating Scale on the targeted behaviors based on the participant condition and pre-test scores.In details, the increasing scores are from the targeted behavior on the engagement subscales from 44 to 62 or 18 points increments, on the communication subscales from 54 to 77 or 23 points increments and on assertiveness subscales from 22 to 59 or 37 points increments.The effectiveness of the intervention is also can be seen from the increasing frequency of targeted behaviors based on the observation of the frequency of targeted behavior before, during and after the intervention.The increasing behavior frequency in communication subscales is 66,7%, in engagement subscales is 72% and in assertiveness subscales is 81%.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9960.984

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.223 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicChild Development and EducationFrench-language works237,207