MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097319545

Differences

2016· article· en· W7097319545 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeasure (data warehouse)Set (abstract data type)Regression analysisPrincipal component analysisPrincipal (computer security)Factor (programming language)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An instrument to measure attitude toward the learning of French as a second language (ALFS) was developed. Instruments already developed to measure motivational intensity and orientations (instrumental and integrative) were modified to fit the local situation. The experimental subjects were 100 students from grades 7 and 8. Twenty-five students were selected randomly from each grade and sex, out of a total of 571, receiving instruction in French by "Le Francais International ° method in a mid-western Canadian city. Each of the subjects was rated on achievement by their respective teachers on a 5-point scale. The ALFS scores intercorrelation matrix produced 4 principal factors which were rotated to varimax- and promax-criterion. These factors were interpreted to be pragmatic, possessive, perseverance, and reflective attitudes. The intercorrelation matrix of the 4 factor scores, motivational intensity, orientations, and achievement ratings, resulted in only one principal factor establishing ALFs factors as correlates of the other variables. A step-wise regression analysis revealed that perseverance factcr and motivational intensity were the most effective of the 7 competing predictors of achievement in French, accounting for 26.8 % of the variance, whereas the entire set of predictors accounted for 30.6 % of the variance. (Author)

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1140.028

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.306 · 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.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207