MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004279120 · doi:10.1177/0146167206288060

Self-Conscious Emotions and Self-Regulation in the Promotion of Condom Use

2006· article· en· W2004279120 on OpenAlexaff
Michaela Hynie, Tara K. MacDonald, Sandra Marques

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCondomPsychologySocial psychologyShamePromotion (chess)Moderated mediationSelf-efficacyPerceived controlDevelopmental psychologyMediationTheory of planned behaviorSelf-consciousnessControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two prospective studies examined the self-regulatory role of anticipated negative self-conscious emotions (ANSCE) in the theory of planned behavior. In Study 1, 147 undergraduates reported condom attitudes, perceived norms, self-efficacy, ANSCE (shame and guilt) should they not use condoms, and intentions to use condoms during the coming 6 weeks. At a 6-week follow-up, ANSCE predicted condom use intentions and behavior and partially mediated the effect of attitudes and norms on both. Study 2 experimentally tested the social nature of self-consciousness in ANSCE; 61 female undergraduates read a scenario priming the private-self or social-self or were assigned to a no-scenario control. They reported condom attitudes, perceived control, ANSCE, condom use intentions, and a 6-week follow-up. ANSCE again predicted condom use intentions. A test of moderated mediation indicated that ANSCE influenced condom intentions more in the social-self condition than in the control condition. Implications of these findings are discussed.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations69
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Social Psychology BulletinSame topicPsychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentFrench-language works237,207