La responsabilidad de la lectura: literatura y holocausto
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
Alexithymia is thought to reflect a deficit in the cognitive capacity to process emotions. Prior research suggests that emotional valence has a memory enhancing effect in poor conceptual learning conditions. This study addressed the question of whether incidental learning of emotional words is a function of alexithymic tendencies. Incidental learning is unintentional learning that results from other activities. The 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and measures of depression and verbal intelligence were administered to 30 nonclinical subjects (15 women, 15 men) whose mean age was 35.5 yr. (SD = 8.6) along with a sequential word-word evaluation task. Partial correlations indicated that the TAS-20 subscale, Difficulties identifying feelings was negatively correlated with recall of positive distractor words but not with recall of neutral distractors or recall of positive or negative target words. Emotional valence appears to have less organizational power in the memory of individuals with difficulties in recognizing their feelings.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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