An Experimental Study on Imitation of Alcohol Consumption in Same-Sex Dyads
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: In order to study the role of imitation in relation to drinking, alcohol consumption among two peers was examined with experiments in a naturalistic drinking setting. METHOD: In a bar lab, 135 young adults (52% women) were exposed to either a non-drinking, a light-drinking or a heavy-drinking same-sex model (i.e. a confederate) in a 30-min time-out session. Instead of using a taste task (Quigley and Collins, 1999. The modeling of alcohol consumption: a meta-analytic review. J Stud Alcohol 60:90-8) in which participants were obliged to consume alcohol, in the current study, a design was used in which participants were allowed to drink alcohol but could also choose non-alcoholic beverages. RESULTS: Craving for alcohol was included as a covariate in ANCOVAs. Results showed that the participants consumed substantially more alcohol when exposed to heavy-drinking models compared to light- and non-drinking models. Craving levels were positively related to alcohol consumption during the experiment. CONCLUSION: Both men and women imitated same-sex peers' drinking behavior in an ad lib naturalistic bar setting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it