The Prototype Analysis of Ren: A Study on College Students’Implicit Theories of Ren
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports a preliminary descriptive approach to the representation of the concept of Ren. According to the prototype theory, researchers collected items (words or phrases) including features and implications of Ren from 172 college students, after which the items were simplified and combined, then 145 prototypes were obtained. After that 78 prototypes with high frequency above 7 were selected and arranged randomly to make a questionnaire, then another 300 college students were made to rate centrality of every prototypes to the meaning of Ren in Likert-typed 5 point scale. A factor analysis was made based on the rate. In terms of the result of factor analysis together with content analysis, the prototypes were classified and coded. The result shows that there are 6 facets of the representation of Ren in college students’ mind:(1) righteousness and keeping faith; (2) wisdom and self-cultivation; (3) filial piety, fraternal duty, and treat others well; (4) policy of benevolence; (5) universal love and clemency; (6)political pioneers and righteous men. The result is helpful for moral education of college students from the microscopic aspect and also can be used for reference to develop China's spiritual civilization from macroscopic perspective.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".