MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015583997 · doi:10.1177/0146167206293986

Stress on the Dance Floor: The Cortisol Stress Response to Social-Evaluative Threat in Competitive Ballroom Dancers

2006· article· en· W2015583997 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Rohleder, Silke E. Beulen, Edith Chen, Jutta M. Wolf, Clemens Kirschbaum

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyStressorSocial stressTrier social stress testDanceCompetition (biology)Stress (linguistics)BallroomDevelopmental psychologyFight-or-flight responseClinical psychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The social self-preservation theory states that humans have a fundamental motivation to preserve the social self and that threats to the social self perturb biological markers such as cortisol. Five studies were designed to examine the cortisol response to competitive ballroom dancing as a paradigm for real-life social-evaluative threat. Competitive dancing produced substantial increases in cortisol compared to a control day. These increases were not due to the physical strain of dancing and were greater than those found during social-evaluative laboratory stressors. Responses did not habituate across competitions and were mostly elevated under highly focused conditions of threat (couple vs. group competition). These findings support the notion of a social self-preservation system that is physiologically responsive to threats to the social self.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations242
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Social Psychology BulletinSame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207