MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1860797124 · doi:10.1177/147470490700500201

Information Behavior: A Socio-Cognitive Ability

2007· article· en· W1860797124 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolutionary Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)SocialityCognitionTraitPsychologySocial cognitionCognitive scienceEcologyCognitive psychologyComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How has human information behavior evolved? Our paper explores this question in the form of notions, models and theories about the relationship between information behavior and human evolution. Alexander's Ecological Dominance and Social Competition/Cooperation (EDSC) model currently provides the most comprehensive overview of human traits in the development of a theory of human evolution and sociality. His model provides a basis for explaining the evolution of human socio-cognitive abilities, including ecological dominance, and social competition/cooperation. Our paper examines the human trait of information behavior as a socio-cognitive ability related to ecological dominance, and social competition/cooperation. The paper first outlines what is meant by information behavior from various interdisciplinary perspectives. We propose that information behavior is a socio-cognitive ability that is related to and enables other socio-cognitive abilities such as human ecological dominance, and social competition/cooperation. The paper reviews the current state of evolutionary approaches to information behavior and future directions for this research

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.349 · 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