The role of amount, cognitive elaboration, and structural consistency of attitude‐relevant knowledge in the formation of attitude certainty
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
Abstract Despite their intuitive plausibility and prominence in theorizing regarding attitude certainty, past studies have provided equivocal evidence for the role of informational and structural consistency factors in perceptions of attitude certainty. The present research attempted to overcome methodological and conceptual limitations in past research in order to establish that amount, cognitive elaboration, and structural consistency of attitude‐relevant knowledge are in fact determinants of attitude certainty. As predicted, certainty was influenced by experimental manipulations of all three constructs. Mediational analyses suggested that the amount and elaboration of information manipulations were mediated by subjective impressions of knowledge. Subjective impressions of amount of thought partially mediated the effects of manipulated elaboration. Finally, perceived ambivalence mediated the effects of manipulated consistency of knowledge. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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