MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987439648 · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0802_15

The Naive Epistemology of a Working Social Psychologist (Or the Working Epistemology of a Naive Social Psychologist): The Value Of Taking “Temporary Givens” Seriously

2004· article· en· W1987439648 on OpenAlexaff
Mark P. Zanna

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Review · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Representations and Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)PsychologyEpistemologySocial psychologySocial epistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article I first describe the origin of 6 recent lines of inquiry. In describing these 6 case studies, I attempt to determine the inspirations for my ideas. I also attempt to determine (a) whether these specific inspirations (or, perhaps, strategies) have occurred in my past research and (b) whether, in conclusion, some general principle can begin to account for how I generate my ideas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.130
Scholarly communication0.0130.028
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0100.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Social Psychology ReviewSame topicSocial Representations and IdentityFrench-language works237,207