MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118436554 · doi:10.1027/1016-9040.9.4.264

Professional Ethics Across National Boundaries

2004· article· en· W2118436554 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychologist · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanityHuman rightsEthical codeDiversity (politics)Political scienceEngineering ethicsCultural diversityAmnestyProfessional ethicsSociologyEnvironmental ethicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Union of Psychological Science is searching for ethical principles that are universal for the discipline of psychology. Codes of ethics adopted by other international organizations are reviewed, as well as recent comparisons of psychology codes across national boundaries. Distinctions are made between declarations of human rights and professional codes of ethics, between ethical principles as overarching values and as rules of conduct, and between Euro-North American and non-Western cultural values. Organizations such as the United Nations and Amnesty International work for the elimination of abuses of human rights. Professional associations establish guidelines to promote the ethical behavior of their members. The hope for articulating universal ethical principles for psychologists is based on respect for our common humanity while still respecting the diversity of beliefs in different cultures.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.007

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.341 · 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