MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997795119 · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.28.3.563

Understanding bias in proportion production.

2002· article· en· W1997795119 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 Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National DefenceDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticsMathematicsBETA (programming language)EconometricsExponentEstimationProduction modelProduction (economics)Computer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Stevens exponent (beta) can be obtained from proportion estimation judgments using the power model. In this article, the authors extend that model to proportion production, in which the relative magnitudes of 2 stimuli are adjusted to correspond to a numeric proportion (e.g., 1/4 or .25). The model predicts that when beta < 1, small proportions are underproduced, and large proportions are overproduced, but it predicts the reverse when beta > 1, which is the opposite of the predicted patterns for estimation. Eight participants estimated and produced magnitudes and proportions with spatial volume (beta < 1; Experiment 1) and color saturation (beta > 1; Experiment 2). The model's predictions were generally supported. An extension of the model using reference points can account for multicycle patterns shown by some participants.

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)0.001
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 score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.001

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 head0.423
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.003 · 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