MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067383818 · doi:10.1080/03057240903101630

Parenting by lying

2009· article· en· W2067383818 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

VenueJournal of Moral Education · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeception detection and forensic psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsLyingHonestyPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyDeceptionSocial psychologyCompliance (psychology)PhenomenonMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present set of studies identifies the phenomenon of `parenting by lying', in which parents lie to their children as a means of influencing their emotional states and behaviour. In Study 1, undergraduates (n = 127) reported that their parents had lied to them while maintaining a concurrent emphasis on the importance of honesty. In Study 2 (n = 127), parents reported lying to their children and considered doing so to be acceptable under some circumstances, even though they also reported teaching their children that lying is unacceptable. As compared to European American parents, Asian American parents tended to hold a more favourable view of lying to children for the purpose of promoting behavioural compliance.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.346 · 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