MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977405864 · doi:10.1080/01973533.2013.856783

Three Questions Regarding the Ecological Validity of Experimental Research on the Impact of Viewing Thin-Ideal Media Images

2014· article· en· W1977405864 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen C. Want

Bibliographic record

VenueBasic and Applied Social Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWarrantIdeal (ethics)Context (archaeology)Social psychologyEcological validityPsychological researchEpistemologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Research in laboratory settings has repeatedly demonstrated that exposure to idealized media images of women can result in detrimental effects on female viewers' satisfaction with their appearance. In this article, it is argued that there remain open questions regarding the extent to which these findings generalize outside the laboratory. These questions concern the context in which media images are presented, the measurement of appearance satisfaction, and the presence of demand characteristics in laboratory-based studies. Such questions warrant answers if psychological research is to inform public debate in this area.

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 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 score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBasic and Applied Social PsychologySame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207