MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049453738 · doi:10.1080/08959285.2010.488258

Performance of UN Military Observer Teams: Does Victim Proximity Escalate Commitment to Saving Lives?

2010· article· en· W2049453738 on OpenAlex

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

VenueHuman Performance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict Management and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National DefenceDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersMinistère de la Défense NationaleDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyMilitary personnelApplied psychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A field experiment examined the tactical peacekeeping behaviors of military-officer teams undergoing training as United Nations military observers. Teams encountered a simulated human-rights violation where two civilians were being abused. Proximity of the female civilian to the team leader was manipulated and significantly influenced teams' commitment to saving the civilians' lives. Proximity increased the frequency of behaviors that were specifically oriented toward saving the civilians' lives and did not increase confrontational behavior. Finally, trainees' performance assessments were lower if they intervened but failed to save lives than if they did little to intervene and also failed to save lives. Notes 1This aspect of design was constrained in this manner by the military training organization and not subject to modification by the research team. 2Proximity was independent of team size, χ2(1, N = 19) = 0.15, ns. There were seven three-member teams in each condition. 3On average, the intervention began 4.9 min (SD = 0.5) after the start of the scenario in the far condition, and 5.2 min (SD = 0.9) after the start of the scenario in the near condition, t(15) = 1.31, ns. In addition, on average, the duration of the intervention was 15.1 s (SD = 8.3) in the near condition, and 16.5 s (SD = 13.8) in the far condition, t(15) = 0.28, ns. 4On average, the scenario ended 8.3 min (SD = 4.1) after the end of the proximity manipulation in the far condition, and 8.3 min (SD = 5.1) after the end of that manipulation in the near condition, t(15) = 0.03, ns. 5All inferential statistics reported are for tests of directional hypotheses. Accordingly, we use an alpha level equal to .05 for one-tailed tests as our criterion for statistical significance in subsequent analyses. 6 r (= z/√n) is a nonparametric effect-size estimator for the Mann-Whitney U statistic (CitationField, 2005). *p < .05.

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)0.001
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 score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.254 · 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