MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070962476 · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.17.2.218

Assessing Interpersonal Perceptions Using the Interpersonal Grid.

2005· article· en· W2070962476 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

VenuePsychological Assessment · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryPsychologyInterpersonal communicationInterpersonal perceptionSocial psychologyPerceptionConvergence (economics)Agency (philosophy)Interpersonal relationshipSocial perceptionDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three studies were conducted using the interpersonal grid, a method for assessing perceptions of agentic and communal behavior based on the interpersonal circumplex. The 1st examined consistency across perceivers and convergence between perceiver and the perceived person. The 2nd examined whether responses to the interpersonal grid were sensitive to an experimental manipulation of portrayed agency and communion. The 3rd used the interpersonal grid in an event-contingent recording study. The reliability and validity of the measure were supported by findings demonstrating generalizability across perceivers, generalizability across perceptions of events involving the same person, convergence between perceiver and perceived person, and sensitivity to changes in levels of agency and communion. Applications of the interpersonal grid to clinical practice and research are described.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.395 · 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