MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109343132 · doi:10.1177/0022022114555764

A Typological and Probabilistic Approach for Exploring Cross-Cultural Differences

2014· article· en· W2109343132 on OpenAlexaff
Hsiu‐Ting Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicLatent class modelHomogeneousFlexibility (engineering)Latent variable modelClass (philosophy)Latent variableComputer scienceStatistical modelEconometricsPsychologyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discrete latent constructs are useful and versatile tools when applied to theories or hypotheses typically made in cultural psychology. The two-level latent class model (TL-LCM) is proposed as an analytical framework using discrete latent variables for underlying typological structure. The typological and probabilistic characteristics of the TL-LCM offer several advantages over the traditional dimensional and deterministic models commonly used in cross-cultural research. Specifically, the TL-LCM allows researchers to form alternative typological hypotheses about the latent constructs instead of being bound with dimensional assumptions of latent constructs. In addition, the TL-LCM provides a probabilistic approach to studying the latent structures simultaneously at two nested levels. The probabilistic characteristic of the TL-LCM also relaxes the strong and often unrealistic assumption that individuals within the same higher unit are homogeneous. Therefore, the TL-LCM not only offers researchers new potential perspectives in exploring differences between cultures, but it also facilitates the process of forming theories and hypotheses so that knowledge and understanding of cultural differences and similarities can be further advanced. Two examples demonstrated the usefulness and flexibility of applying the TL-LCM to analyze nested cross-cultural data. The examples showed that differences between countries can be thought of as arising from the fact that individuals within different countries have different probabilities of falling into one of multiple classes, rather than assuming that the individuals within each country are homogeneous.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.172 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cross-Cultural PsychologySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207