Remembering Everyday Experience Through the Prism of Self-Esteem
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
Two studies examined whether global self-esteem was associated with bias in memory for autobiographical experience. For 7 days, participants described specific events and made ratings of their experience (i.e., state self-esteem, positive and negative emotion, and perceived valence of the event) in response to each event. Later, participants were presented with their event descriptions and were asked to recall their experience ratings from memory. As hypothesized, higher global self-esteem predicted positive shifts in memory for experience, whereas lower global self-esteem predicted negative shifts in memory for experience. Patterns of bias were strongest for remembered state self-esteem, moderate for positive emotion, and minimal for event valence. Self-esteem did not predict bias for negative emotion. Mood at the time of recall (measured in Study 2) generally did not account for the patterns. These findings strengthen the view that self-esteem is a rich source of knowledge about the self that can influence memory for some kinds of autobiographical experience.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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