Is that Your Final Answer: Testing Perceptual Asymmetry Biases on Responses to Likert-Scales
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
The present study explores the effects that pseudoneglect, a perceptual asymmetry bias, has on responses to Likert-‐scales. Pseudoneglect is the tendency for neurotypical individuals to mis-‐bisect horizontal lines, generally erring to the left of veridical center. The present study hypothesized that a general leftward bias would be seen in participant responses to Likert-‐scales. The study sample consisted of 20 participants (11 male, 9 female) who were tested using two versions of the National Student Survey (NSS)—an original and an altered version. A leftward bias was revealed between scale versions in two of five response categories. However, further analysis of responses that had changed between scale types was not significant. There was also no significant difference of overall satisfaction between scale versions. Although one analysis presented evidence for a leftward bias, the overall results cannot support evidence of pseudoneglect as further analyses failed to reach statistical significance. Implications for these findings and suggestions for further research are discussed.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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