Kindergarten Teachers’ Beliefs and Responses to\nHypothetical Prosocial, Asocial, and Antisocial\nChildren
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to explore kindergarten teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward hypothetical children who frequently displayed certain types of behaviors with peers in the classroom. Participants were 202 kindergarten teachers from 4 provinces in Canada. Teachers responded to hypothetical vignettes describing children exhibiting shy, unsociable, aggressive, and prosocial behaviors. Beliefs assessed included teachers’ tolerances of the behaviors, their behavioral attributions, the estimated academic and social costs to the child as a result of these behaviors, and teachers’ responses to each hypothetical child. Teachers reported unique patterns of beliefs and responses toward each of the different types of children described. Not surprisingly, results indicated that teachers had the harshest beliefs toward the aggressive children. However, teachers also clearly distinguished between hypothetical children who were shy versus unsociable, whereas previous research has confounded these behaviors. Results are discussed in terms of the links between teacher beliefs/responses and child socioemotional adjustment at school.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it