“I'm Okay. You're Drunk!” Self-Other Differences in the Perceived Effects of Alcohol in Real-Life Incidents of Aggression
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
A general-population telephone survey of 1,753 Ontario adults was used to identify self-other differences in the perceptions of alcohol use, intoxication, and contributing effects of alcohol in incidents of physical aggression among the 152 respondents who had experienced such an incident in the past year. Respondents reported that opponents were significantly more intoxicated and that alcohol was more likely to have contributed to the opponent's aggression than to the respondent's. Self-other differences in the perceived role of alcohol remained significant when controlling for gender, usual drinking pattern of the respondent, whether only the opponent was physically aggressive, and whether the opponent was more intoxicated. These results suggest that people perceive themselves to be less affected by alcohol than their opponents are in incidents of aggression. This self-other difference is likely to influence both the escalation of aggression and the extent to which persons apportion responsibility to themselves and to others.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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