MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121096136 · doi:10.1521/jscp.2008.27.5.505

Public Stigma of Disordered Gambling: Social Distance, Dangerousness, and Familiarity

2008· article· en· W2121096136 on OpenAlex
Jenny D. Horch, David C. Hodgins

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

VenueJournal of Social and Clinical Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyVignetteSocial distanceAttributionStigma (botany)Ethnic groupContext (archaeology)Clinical psychologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disordered gambling stigma was examined. University students (117 male, 132 female) rated vignettes describing males with five health conditions (schizophrenia, alcohol dependence, disordered gambling, cancer, and a no diagnosis control with subclinical problems) on a measure of attitudinal social distance. A mixed ANOVA revealed that, in keeping with hypotheses, disordered gambling was more stigmatized than the cancer and control conditions. Interactions suggested that stigma may be influenced by context (i.e., order of vignette appearance) and participant characteristics (i.e., sex and ethnicity), although follow–up analyses revealed this was not the case for disordered gambling. Perceived dangerousness attributions and familiarity (previous experience with a disordered gambler) were also examined. As predicted, perceived dangerousness was positively correlated with social distance scores. Familiarity ratings were unrelated to social distance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.486
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.036 · 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