Jekyll & Hyde in the East & West: Cross-cultural variations in conceptions of self-unity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jekyll et Hyde a l’Est et a l’Ouest: variations interculturelles dans les conceptions de l’unite du soiCe texte met en evidence les facons dont des etudiants issus de cultures differentes justifient, en depit d’evidences contraires, leur conviction selon laquelle la logique du soi veut que les individus soient apprehendes comme consistants au travers des differents roles et contextes dans lesquels ils s’inserent. Si, au travers de l’histoire, chacun s’accorde a reconnaitre l’importance que revet pour l’individu la consistance du soi, force est de reconnaitre que cette question n’a pas recu a ce jour l’attention qu’elle merite. Les individus œuvrent-ils a maintenir leur conviction parce qu’ils sont confrontes a l’evidence qu’ils changent tels des cameleons?? Dans ce cas, les efforts pour resoudre le paradoxe classique de la similitude dans le changement varient-ils selon leur culture d’origine?? Des etudiants d’une grande universite canadienne et un groupe d’etudiants visiteurs provenant de Kyoto, au Japon, devaient expliquer differentes formes d’inconsistance concernant le cas fictif de Dr. Jekyll et Mr. Hyde, les comportements d’une connaissance, ou leurs propres inconsistances comportementales. Les reponses ont ete codees en quatre categories selon le degre auquel le soi est concu comme consistant et agentique. Les sujets issus des deux cultures different dans la facon dont ils apprehendent leur propre consistance et celle d’autrui, ainsi que celle du cas fictif de Dr. Jekyll et Mr. Hyde. Dans l’ensemble, les sujets canadiens favorisent une conception relativement inconsistante et reactive du soi, alors que les Japonais presentent une palette plus large de conceptions du soi.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".