MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982311052 · doi:10.1080/00223891.2010.528483

The FAD–Plus: Measuring Lay Beliefs Regarding Free Will and Related Constructs

2010· article· en· W1982311052 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

VenueJournal of Personality Assessment · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFree Will and Agency
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the development of FAD-Plus, a 27-item measure of lay beliefs in free will and 3 closely related constructs: scientific determinism, fatalistic determinism, and unpredictability. Previously published measures included only a subset of these variables and tended to assume an a priori pattern of relations among these 4 beliefs. In Study 1, exploratory factor analyses suggested relatively independent factors. This independence was sustained in Study 2, using a confirmatory analysis. Each of the 4 subscales (Free Will, Scientific Determinism, Fatalistic Determinism, and Unpredictability) showed acceptable internal consistencies. Study 2 also mapped out associations with the Big Five personality traits and showed that believing in free will is not synonymous with having an internal locus of control. Study 3 replicated the instrument's structure and subscale reliabilities in a community sample. Preliminary applications are described.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.252 · 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