MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978627554 · doi:10.2466/pr0.2002.90.2.361

Emotional Intelligence and Prosocial Behaviors in Adolescents

2002· article· en· W1978627554 on OpenAlex

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

VenuePsychological Reports · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsocial behaviorPsychologyConscientiousnessAltruism (biology)Civic virtueEmotional intelligenceOrganizational citizenship behaviorSocial psychologyHelping behaviorDevelopmental psychologyPersonalityEmpathyVirtueBig Five personality traitsOrganizational commitmentExtraversion and introversion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between emotional intelligence and prosocial behaviors and sex differences in 134 adolescents involved in a 6-wk. training camp run by the military was investigated. They were asked to evaluate themselves on emotional intelligence and randomly chosen peers evaluated them on prosocial behaviors, indicated by organizational citizenship behaviors, a measure used in work organizations. Ratings of emotional intelligence significantly correlated with scores on two of the five organizational citizenship behavior factors: Altruism (r = .25, p < .01) and Civic virtue (r = .24, p < .01). The girls scored somewhat, but not significantly, higher than the boys on Emotional Intelligence, Altruism, Conscientiousness, and Civic virtue, an observation which might be explored further.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0050.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.282 · 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