Psychologists on Psychology: The Inquiry Beliefs of Psychologists by Subdiscipline, Gender, and Age
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
Three hundred six psychologists, all members of the American Psychological Association, responded to a questionnaire on which they rated various theoretical–philosophical statements concerning the conduct of psychological inquiry. Results were considered in relation to the subdiscipline of psychology to which respondents belonged, their gender, and their decade of birth. Results for subdiscipline indicated progressively weaker relative support for naturalism, reductionism, empiricism, and experimentalism as the context of subdisciplinary inquiry became increasingly broad. Women were less attached to experimental methods than men and displayed a stronger belief in the importance of political factors in research than did their male counterparts. Finally, younger psychologists believed more strongly in the importance of presentation skills such as good writing and rhetoric with respect to research and academic success.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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