MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Social axioms in Iran and Canada: Intercultural contact, coping and adjustment

2006· article· en· W2110122689 on OpenAlexaffabout
Saba Safdar, J. Rees Lewis, Manijeh Daneshpour

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal Of Social Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmony (color)Coping (psychology)Social psychologyPsychologyAxiomImmigrationLife satisfactionSocial harmonySociologyClinical psychologySocial scienceGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A comparison was made between Iranian participants living in Iran, Iranian immigrants to Canada, and Canadian‐born participants on the Social Axioms Scale (SAS), including a sixth dimension, Harmony. The Iranian immigrants to Canada endorsed views that were intermediate between the other two groups. In the data from Iran, the relationships between social axioms on the one hand and measures of active coping and adjustment on the other were examined. Belief in Reward for Application predicted Active Coping; acknowledgment of Social Complexity predicted Life‐Satisfaction; and endorsement of belief in Harmony predicted Mastery. Those whose beliefs on Harmony and Social Complexity were closer to their country mean were higher on Mastery and Self‐Esteem, but those whose beliefs on Fate Control were closer to the country mean showed lower Life‐Satisfaction.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations61
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal Of Social PsychologySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207