My friend is embarrassing me: Exploring the guilty by association effect.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is contended that people (known here as associates) erroneously believe that their social standing suffers when people with whom they are associated (offenders) act in socially inappropriate ways. Accordingly, the anticipated evaluations of associates and observers were contrasted in 6 studies. Study 1 participants read a second-person scenario from the perspective of an associate or an observer. Associates anticipated that observers would give them less positive ratings when the offender picked his or her nose (versus control), but observers' ratings were unaffected. In Study 2, associates erroneously anticipated that observers' ratings of them would vary systematically as a function of whether or not they were introduced as friends of an offender who had/had not committed academic misconduct. In Study 3, anticipated ratings of associates were negatively affected by the actions of an offender whom they did not know previously. Study 4 showed that perspective-taking is the key to attenuating the effect and reducing feelings of embarrassment. The last 2 studies clarified the role of physical proximity and felt closeness. Consistent with results of a scenario study (Study 5), Study 6 participants' anticipated ratings were negatively affected by a combination of increased physical proximity and felt closeness.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".