MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1608151924 · doi:10.15173/jpc.v4i2.2627

Personality and positive psychology in social media and post-secondary education

2016· article· en· W1608151924 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Professional Communication · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaPersonalityPsychologyStyle (visual arts)Social psychologyContent (measure theory)Content analysisSociologySocial sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the relationship between personality type, academic background, and social media content. Ten participants from each of McMaster University’s seven undergraduate faculties completed a Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment to determine their personality type. They submitted 10 personally-written status updates or comments from the social media platforms of Twitter or Facebook. The Content Analysis of Verbatim Explanation (CAVE) method was used to analyze 630 social media content to determine overall positive or negative explanatory style. Of the 630 submitted pieces social media content, 68.4% of them were found to describe positive events. 92.1% of the social media content contained an optimistic explanatory style. These findings suggest that social media is a largely positive medium for university students.©Journal of Professional Communication, all rights reserved.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.374 · 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