Gender and relationships: Influences on agentic and communal behaviors
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present research examined the moderating influence of situations involving friends and romantic partners on gender differences in interpersonal behaviors reflecting agency and communion. Behavior was studied in three situations varying in social role and dyadic gender composition: same‐sex friendships, opposite‐sex friendships, and romantic relationships. To obtain multiple events representing each relationship situation, participants recorded information about their interpersonal interactions during a 20‐day period using an event‐contingent recording procedure. Results indicated gender differences consistent with gender stereotypes when men and women were interacting with same‐sex friends; men with men were more dominant and women with women were more agreeable. In interactions with romantic partners, gender differences in communal behavior were opposite to gender stereotypes; women were less agreeable and more quarrelsome than men with their romantic partners. Results are considered in reference to developmental socialization theory, social role theory, and studies of gender differences in marital relationships.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it