Cross-Cultural Differences in Reactions to Daily Events as Indicators of Cross-Cultural Differences in Self-Construction and Affect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Every day for two weeks, participants at four sites (2 in the US, 1 in Canada, and 1 in Japan) described their self-esteem and affect and they described the events that occurred each day. Multilevel random coefficient modeling analyses found that the self_esteem of Japanese participants changed more in reaction to daily social events (both positive and negative) than it did for North American participants. For positive social events, the Japanese were more reactive in terms of positive affect than North Americans. For negative social events, the Japanese were more reactive in terms of depressed mood (ND) and deactive positive affect (PD) than North Americans. In contrast, the Japanese were less reactive to negative achievement events than North Americans in terms of PA and anxious mood. The Japanese were more reactive than North Americans to positive achievement events in terms of PA and ND. The results highlight the greater sensitivity of the Japanese to social concerns compared to North Americans, and the greater affective sensitivity of North Americans to failure in achievement domains.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".