MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072955335 · doi:10.1348/000712607x251243

Cognitive Ethology: A new approach for studying human cognition

2008· article· en· W2072955335 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

VenueBritish Journal of Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEmbodied and Extended Cognition
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthologyCognitionPsychologyCognitive scienceSet (abstract data type)Complement (music)Animal cognitionCognitive psychologyNatural (archaeology)Computer scienceNeuroscienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We all share a desire to understand and predict human cognition and behaviour as it occurs within complex real-world situations. This target article seeks to open a dialogue with our colleagues regarding this common goal. We begin by identifying the principles of most lab-based investigations and conclude that adhering to them will fail to generate valid theories of human cognition and behaviour in natural settings. We then present an alternative set of principles within a novel research framework called 'Cognitive Ethology'. We discuss how Cognitive Ethology can complement lab-based investigations, and we show how its levels of description and explanation are distinct from what is typically employed in lab-based research.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.196 · 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