Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using theory and data from emotional neurobiology, I suggest a neurally realistic model of the dialogical self. The model is premised on Hermans' idea of voicing and its implications for motivation, action and subjectivity. Because states of motivated attention unify brain activity, coexisting I-positions are as problematic for neuroscience as they are for psychology. To overcome this problem, I postulate an internal monologue in which the familiar I-position is subserved by an attentional system in the orbitofrontal cortex, linked with nearby affective and premotor areas. This internal monologue is fueled by gist-like perceptual expectancies of an-other's response, and it perpetuates and adjusts itself by updating these expectancies. A second I-position may be underpinned by an attentional system in the anterior cingulate cortex and its connections. These two attentional systems are partly independent, and they compete for control based on changes in emotional content and intensity. Thus, switching activation between them may account for semi-autonomous, but not coexisting, I-positions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".