MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003400186 · doi:10.3200/socp.149.3.305-322

Relational-Interdependent Self-Construal as a Predictor of Relationship Quality: The Mediating Roles of One's Own Behaviors and Perceptions of the Fulfillment of Friendship Functions

2009· article· en· W2003400186 on OpenAlexaff
Marian M. Morry, Mie Kito

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Social Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipClosenessPsychologyInterdependenceSocial psychologyPerceptionInterpersonal relationshipQuality (philosophy)Similarity (geometry)Structural equation modelingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Relational-interdependent self-construal (RISC) is the tendency to think of oneself in terms of relationships with close others, and it influences relationship cognitions (e.g., closeness, commitment, perceived similarity). The authors expected individuals high in RISC to report more relationship supportive behaviors (RSB; e.g., higher levels of trust, more intimate disclosures), experience greater fulfillment of friendship functions (FrFu; e.g., help, emotional security, stimulating companionship), and report higher relationship quality than individuals low in RISC. The authors also hypothesized that RSB would mediate the RISC-friendship function and the RISC-relationship quality relations and that FrFu would mediate the relation between RSB and relationship quality. Structural equation modeling supported the authors' hypotheses. These effects did not differ across friendship type (same or cross sex). The authors discuss the importance of self-construal for relationship research.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations103
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Social PsychologySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207