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 OpenAlexaff
Justin G. Hollands, Takeshi Tanaka, Brian P. Dyre

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.423
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

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

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & PerformanceSame topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207