MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032512271 · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.72.1.72

Retrospective and Prospective Reports of Precipitants to Relapse in Pathological Gambling.

2004· article· en· W2032512271 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

VenueJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyEveningFeelingPathologicalAttributionAffect (linguistics)PsychiatryClinical psychologyCognitionSubstance abuseInternal medicineSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A prospective design was used to explore the precipitants of relapse in a naturalistic sample of pathological gamblers (N = 101) who had recently quit gambling. Relapse rates were high; only 8% were entirely free of gambling during the 12-month follow-up. Relapses were highly variable but occurred most frequently in the evening, when the person was alone and thinking about finances. Moods prior to the gambling were as likely to be positive as negative. The most frequently reported attributions, particularly for major relapses, were cognitions about winning and feeling the need to make money, unlike substance abuse relapses that tend to be attributed to negative affect. Some gender differences were found, but the precipitants of shorter and longer relapses did not differ.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.345 · 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