(Quebec). Instructional Media Cf fice.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hypothesis that students will express no preference between carrels and open table type of accommodation in a language laboratory was tested in a four-week study. Two identical rooms, one containing carrels and the other containing open tables, were connected tc a single control room and lsed by 1,080 university students (enrolled in language courses) who served as subjects. The students were observed in four week-long phases in which their behavior in selecting and using labcratory accommodation was observed; a verbal instrument designed to solicit factors in their selection of laboratory acccmmodation was administered; a questionnaire to determine each subject's normal choice of acccmmcdation; whether he attended sessions alone or with a friend, and the effects cf restricting him to cne or the other cf the rocms was completed by each student. Another observation procedure which identified subject choices by sex and a short questionnaire designed to identify preference; isolation, social, and interference variables were completed. Findings were that while students verbally preferred carrels, they actually used tables, that students at carrels were mcre easily disturbed, and that female students were more decisive in their choice of open tables and were more likely to attend with friends. (A nine-item bibliography is included.) (SP).4"11fff alliglirs141.1,411
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.742 | 0.282 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".