MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985219074 · doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000093

Bearing Witness

2012· article· en· W1985219074 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

VenueSocial Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotions and Moral Behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShameAngerPsychologyWitnessSocial psychologyAffect (linguistics)Action (physics)Developmental psychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recognizing discrimination does not necessarily translate into victim support. Willingness to provide support to a female victim of gender discrimination was hypothesized to vary as a function of whether the participant was male or female, along with the emotions conveyed by the victim (anger, shame, or no affect). Participants (N = 198) heard an audiotaped accounting of a woman’s discriminatory (vs. nondiscriminatory) conflict. When the victim encountered discrimination, males saw her as less blameworthy when she expressed anger, but their support was enhanced when she expressed shame. Females’ own anger predicted willingness to provide tangible support, although victim shame also elicited support. Thus, anger might motivate taking action, but its expression did not garner the support of others.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0040.002

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.335 · 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