Erroneous verbalizations and risk taking at video lotteries
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
This study examined the effect of erroneous perceptions verbalized by a game accomplice on participants' gambling. The sample consisted of 22 men and 10 women, aged 18 and older, who did not show excessive gambling problems, but who had played video lotteries at least once during the last 6 months. The participants were randomly assigned into one of three groups, where they gambled in the presence of an accomplice who verbalized three types of perceptions: (1) the accomplice emitted erroneous thoughts about gambling, (2) the accomplice verbalized adequate thoughts about gambling, or (3) the accomplice did not speak. Results showed that players exposed to an accomplice's erroneous verbalizations took significantly more risks than players in the other two groups. Erroneous perceptions appear to be easily transmissible and have impacts on gambling behaviour. The practical and theoretical implications of these results 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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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