MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054373505 · doi:10.1037/a0031246

Achieving a global psychology.

2013· article· en· W2054373505 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyApplied psychologyPsychoanalysisCognitive psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractPsychology has a long history in only a few countries of world. Initially developed in Europe and United States, it necessarily has close ties cultural traditions of those particular societies. As a result, discipline and practice of psychology are largely culture-bound, limited in its origins, concepts, and empirical findings only this small portion of world. The discipline is also culture-blind, largely ignoring influence of role of culture in shaping development and display of human behaviour. This article draws concepts and strategies in psychology (particularly cross-cultural and intercultural psychology) propose some remedies these problems. It is based a universalist vision for discipline; this view asserts that basic psychological processes are common our species, while their development and expression are culturally shaped. The eventual goal is achieve a global psychology that incorporates concepts and findings from societies and cultures from all parts of world.Keywords: acculturation strategies, culture-blind, culture-bound, dominance, emic, etic, global psychology, indigenous psychology, prevention, universalismThe discipline and practice of psychology have long histories in only a few countries of world. Initially developed in Europe, then further in United States, it has close ties cultural traditions of those particular societies. Although more and more taught, studied and practiced in other parts of world, psychology remains largely culture-bound (Berry, Poortinga, Segali & Dasen, 1992; Henrich, Heine & Norenzayan, 2010), being limited in its origins, concepts, and empirical findings only a small portion of world. And although concept of culture has been recognised as a core variable in psychology in a book that documents origin and development of 15 key psychological concepts (Berry & Triandis, 2006), discipline has also been culture-blind, largely ignoring influence of role of culture in shaping development and display of human behaviour.As a result of these limitations, missing from international scene are insights, and knowledge of psychology from largest, most complex and in many ways earliest-developed societies of world. In particular, psychological contributions from China, India, and Arab world are largely unknown Western psychology. Similarly missing are those from societies in Africa, and indigenous peoples in North and South America, and Pacific region.If human beings are all one people, belonging one species, how can a discipline that thinks of itself as the science of human behaviour not be based all human experience and knowledge? Answers this rhetorical question serve a basis for my approach development of a global psychology. In this article, I argue that discipline and profession of psychology are overwhelmingly rooted in and practiced in Western Euroamerican societies (Pawlik & Rosenzweig, 2000). The rest of world has often assumed roles of consumers or subjects; psychology is sold to or tried out on other peoples. The evidence for this state of affairs has been clearly presented by Adair, Coehlo and Luna, (2002); Adair and Kagitcibasi (1995); Allwood and Berry (2006); and Cole (2006). For example, Cole (2006, p. 905) has noted that leadership of international psychology, particularly International Union of Psychological Science has remained firmly in Euro American hands. These countries dominate participation and management of congress this day, despite fact that psychologists from approximately 100 countries currently participate (Rosenzweig, Holtzman, Sabourin, & Belanger, 2000).To deal with these limitations, I argue that human behavioural diversity needs be fully sampled and examined in all its variety, as a basis for discerning what may be common all human behaviour. …

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.013

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.287 · 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