MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034664861 · doi:10.1177/1948550612460060

To Partition or Not to Partition Evaluative Judgments

2012· article· en· W2034664861 on OpenAlexaff
Erica J. Refling, Catherine M. Calnan, Leandre R. Fabrigar, Tara K. MacDonald, Victoria Johnson, Steven M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Psychological and Personality Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbivalencePsychologySocial psychologyPartition (number theory)Cognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attitudinal ambivalence is one of the most widely studied structural properties in the attitudes literature. The current research compared two commonly used measures of structural ambivalence. Both measures separately assess the positive and negative components of ambivalence; however, one approach instructs participants to partition their oppositely valenced evaluative responses whereas the other does not. Using both experimental and nonexperimental designs, four studies revealed that the nonpartitioned measure was more sensitive to manipulations of attitudinal ambivalence (Studies 1 and 2) and was a better predictor of subjective ambivalence (Studies 1– 4). Potential reasons for this distinction are discussed.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Psychological and Personality ScienceSame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207