MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044497571 · doi:10.1080/00222895.2013.794767

IOR Effects in a Social Free-Choice Task

2013· article· en· W2044497571 on OpenAlex
Connor Reid, Lokman Wong, Jay Pratt, Catherine Morgan, Timothy N. Welsh

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Motor Behavior · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInhibition of returnPsychologyStimulus (psychology)Social psychologyCognitive psychologyChoice reaction timeSimon effectAffect (linguistics)Response biasDevelopmental psychologyCommunicationPerceptionCognitionVisual attentionNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social inhibition of return (S-IOR) refers to the finding that reaction times (RTs) are longer for movements to the same location as a partner's previous response. Wilson and Pratt (2007) found that when people acting alone freely chose their responses, they were less likely to choose a response that was spatially-compatible with a recently presented stimulus, suggesting that the processes underlying IOR effects in RT also affect response selection. The current study investigated if a similar response selection bias would occur in a free-choice S-IOR task. It was found that participants were less likely to move to the location that their partner previously contacted. This similarity in responses biases in free-choice tasks is generally consistent with the notion that similar processes underlie individual and S-IOR.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.301 · 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