MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1504788224 · doi:10.15353/joci.v10i1.2673

Shared identity and personal tie in influencing cooperative behavior

2013· article· en· W1504788224 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hao Jiang, John M. Carroll

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial identity theoryIdentity (music)Social capitalResource (disambiguation)Social identity approachInterpersonal tiesSocial psychologyPublic relationsResource Acquisition Is InitializationShared resourceCollective identityCommon-pool resourceCreating shared valueSociologyCollective actionPsychologySocial groupPolitical scienceResource allocationComputer scienceManagementEconomicsSocial scienceComputer securityMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a lab study on cooperative behavior in an economic game setting. We are particularly interested in two important social relations, namely shared identity and social ties, in influencing cooperative behavior, a form of social capital. The study suggests that both shared identity and social tie can lead to cooperation, but in different ways: shared identity will help resource reach wider recipients and social ties can concentrate resource distribution between persons who are connected. This finding has implication for practitioners and action researchers who are interested in community informatics.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.203
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.210 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207