MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008158939 · doi:10.1177/0164027504270489

The Sense of Divine Control and the Self-Concept

2005· article· en· W2008158939 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

VenueResearch on Aging · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReligiositySocioeconomic statusAssociation (psychology)Sense of controlPsychologySocial psychologyContext (archaeology)Control (management)StressorRace (biology)Developmental psychologyDemographyClinical psychologySociologyPopulationGender studiesGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using data from adults aged 65 and older in the District of Columbia and two adjoining counties in Maryland, this study examines the relationship between the sense of divine control and two self-concepts: self-esteem and mastery. Perceived divine control involves the extent to which an individual perceives that God controls the direction and outcomes of life. Among Whites only, divine control is associated negatively with mastery. Adjustments for socioeconomic status, other forms of religiosity, and stressors contribute to that race-contingent association. In addition, among Blacks, divine control is associated positively with self-esteem—especially among Black women. That effect remains net of socioeconomic and other controls. Conversely, among white men, divine control is associated negatively with self-esteem, although adjustment for socioeconomic status explains most of that association. The authors discuss these findings in the context of the ongoing debate about the psychological effects of different forms of religiosity.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.386 · 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