MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031510453 · doi:10.1080/14616730500039606

Attachment state of mind and perceptual processing of emotional stimuli

2005· article· en· W2031510453 on OpenAlexaff
Markus Maier, Annie Bernier, Reinhard Pekrun, Peter Zimmermann, Karin Strasser, Klaus E. Grossmann

Bibliographic record

VenueAttachment & Human Development · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionSocial perceptionEmotion perceptionCognitive psychologyAttachment measuresVigilance (psychology)Developmental psychologyAttachment theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between attachment state of mind and perceptual processing of social and non-social, affective, and neutral material. A total of 57 young adults completed the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) plus an experimental task in which their perceptual thresholds to different types of pictures were assessed. Significant correlations were found between the AAI dimensions and perceptual thresholds for social stimuli such as social interactions or human faces displaying emotional expressions. As expected, no relationships were found between the AAI and perception of neutral stimuli. The pattern of correlations was especially clear for the dismissing dimension. The results suggest that higher vigilance to social stimuli is related to dismissing attachment tendencies and, to a milder degree, to preoccupied tendencies.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations66
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAttachment & Human DevelopmentSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207