MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Self‐Esteem Differences in the Effects of Hypocrisy Induction on Behavioral Intentions in the Health Domain

2008· article· en· W1963670362 on OpenAlex
Alexandra A. Peterson, Graeme A. Haynes, James M. Olson

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

VenueJournal of Personality · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypocrisyCognitive dissonancePsychologySocial psychologySelf-esteemClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two studies investigated whether individuals with varying levels of self-esteem respond differently in the hypocrisy paradigm. In the first study, all participants were regular smokers. Those in the hypocrisy condition delivered a speech in front of a camera on the dangers of smoking. The principal dependent measure was the intention to stop smoking. In the second study, participants in the hypocrisy condition wrote a public (personally identifiable) passage about the importance of a healthy lifestyle. The principal dependent measure was the intention to improve one's health behaviors. In both studies, self-esteem scores were positively related to intentions to change behavior in the hypocrisy condition but not in a control condition. The implications of these findings for conceptions of self-esteem and for dissonance theory 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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.299 · 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