Le raisonnement sociomoral à lâadolescence : la contribution spécifique des fonctions exécutives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le raisonnement sociomoral (RSM) est une habileté essentielle durant l’adolescence, car elle guide les décisions sociales, facilitant le fonctionnement social. Quelques facteurs sociocognitifs et socioémotionnels semblent favoriser l’évolution du RSM, cependant leur contribution particulière reste nébuleuse, car ils ont été étudiés de façon isolée. Cette étude explore les habiletés associées au RSM mature chez les adolescents en santé, ainsi que la contribution spécifique des fonctions exécutives, en utilisant un outil écologiquement valide pour cette population. Nous avons détecté quatre contributeurs\nindépendants du RSM mature : l’âge, l’intelligence, la flexibilité cognitive et la fluence verbale, ainsi que des différences de genre concernant la maturité du RSM et la prise de décision sociomorale. Les résultats de cette étude contribuent à améliorer la compréhension du développement moral à l’adolescence et soulignent l’importance d’utiliser des outils écologiquement valides pour mesurer les habiletés sociales.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".