MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Actor–Partner Interdependence Model

2015· other· en· W1538550169 on OpenAlexaff
Lorne Campbell, Sarah C. E. Stanton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPartner effectsInterdependencePsychologyMultilevel modelStructural equation modelingRomanceHierarchical database modelSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceData miningMachine learningPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The actor–partner interdependence model (APIM) is a versatile statistical framework designed to analyze and interpret data obtained from dyads. The model stresses the importance of considering how people influence each other (i.e., that people are interdependent). In particular, the APIM allows researchers to estimate, simultaneously and separately, how a person's independent variable score affects not only his or her own outcomes, but also his or her partner's outcomes. APIM data can be analyzed using both multilevel modeling and structural equation modeling. To date, the APIM has generated interesting and informative findings in many areas of psychology, including romantic relationships, friendships, parent–child relationships, and client–therapist relationships.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Encyclopedia of Clinical PsychologySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207