MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7154587012 · doi:10.48448/n0k2-zg36

Drawing Privacy: How Children Conceptualize Regulation and Content Across Development

2025· other· W7154587012 on OpenAlexaff
Cognitive Science Society 2025, Shaylene E Nancekivell, Sarah Petriw, Erica Pouteau, Kyla Sarmiento

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2025
Typeother
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Content (measure theory)Control (management)Content analysisInformation privacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children’s understanding of privacy develops as they navigate both physical and digital spaces. This study examines how children aged 3- to 13- years-old conceptualize privacy through their drawings, analyzing data from the Privacy Illustrated dataset. We explored two key dimensions: regulation (mechanisms controlling access, such as doors) and content (what children consider private, such as bedrooms or intellectual property). Our findings suggest that as children get older, they are more likely to view privacy as something that can be actively managed using physical barriers and control mechanisms. In contrast, younger children often depicted privacy as simply being alone. Content-related depictions remained relatively stable across ages, though older children included more abstract ideas, such as digital privacy. This study provides a novel framework for examining privacy development, highlighting distinct but interrelated dimensions of privacy.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.012
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207