MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108425471 · doi:10.1177/0959354306067445

Introduction: Reclaiming the <i>Social</i> in Social Psychology

2006· article· en· W2108425471 on OpenAlexaff
Henderikus J. Stam

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory & Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity psychologySociologyCritical psychologyEpistemologyTheoretical psychologyPsychologySocial psychologySocial scienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The articles in this special issue cover a range of critical issues and approaches in social psychology. Two of their common features are: (a) their restatement—in various forms—of the unresolved epistemological problems that continue to inform critical discussions of social psychology; and (b) the rarely debated question of just what makes social psychology social . These two questions are interlocking: the undecided nature of the latter eventually creates an impassable barrier to resolving the former. Focusing on a cross-section of issues derived from the social psychology literature presented in this issue, I introduce the problematic and contested nature of the domain of social psychology.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory & PsychologySame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207