From Emotional Intelligence to Intelligent Choice of Partner
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors examined interpersonal correlates of emotional intelligence (EI) in a sample of individuals with a history of depression. The authors focused on potentially adaptive relationship dynamics associated with EI that may help protect these vulnerable individuals from further distress. Participants with high EI, as measured with the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test, saw their partners as less hostile, critical, and rejecting in their support styles than did participants with low EI. Partners' own reports mostly corroborated these findings. Unexpectedly, although partners of high EI participants reported offering less active and directive support than did partners of low EI participants, high EI participants perceived their partners as more supportive than did low EI participants. Partners of emotionally intelligent participants also reported being more conscientious and open to experiences, offering some evidence of the stress-buffering hypothesis associated with higher EI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it