MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065414491 · doi:10.1080/13506280143000313

Sources of object-specific effects in representational momentum

2002· article· en· W2065414491 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

VenueVisual Cognition · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Animal Learning Development
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Denver
KeywordsObject (grammar)PsychologyCognitive psychologyContext (archaeology)Stimulus (psychology)CommunicationCognitive scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study we explore the sources of object-specific effects in representational momentum (RM). "Object-specific effects" refers to the elicitation of different patterns of RM by different objects. We examined whether object-specific effects could be produced by an object's conceptual context, visual features, or their interaction. The conceptual context was composed of the object's label with, in some cases, a description of the object, plus experimental trials requiring the participant to identify the object. In addition, we examined whether the contribution of visual features to objectspecific effects came from one particular visual feature previously linked to RM (pointedness), or from the object's overall appearance. Our results show that generally, the stimulus' overall appearance must be consistent with its conceptual context for related conceptual knowledge to produce object-specific RM effects. These experiments therefore provide evidence that knowledge particular to an object, or its category, unconsciously affects mental transformations.

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 score0.476
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.281 · 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