MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125286825 · doi:10.1177/0022022104266109

A Theory of Uncertainty Orientation

2004· article· en· W2125286825 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUncertainty avoidanceOptimismCollectivismIndividualismCertaintySocial psychologyPsychologyHofstede's cultural dimensions theoryOrientation (vector space)EconometricsMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigates whether Canadian and Japanese university students differ in how they deal with uncertainty. In addition to examining individual differences in uncertainty orientation, Weinstein's measure of unrealistic optimism and Hofstede’s measures of uncertainty avoidance and individualism-collectivism were examined. Participants were 535 Canadian and Japanese undergraduate men and women. In support of the main prediction, Canadian students were found to be more uncertainty oriented (UO) as compared to Japanese students, who were more certainty oriented(CO) ( p< .001). It is interesting to note that significant Uncertainty Orientation Country interactions on the additional measures were also found. Whereas COs showed high levels of unrealistic optimism and uncertainty avoidance and low levels of individualism in Canada, UOs showed this pattern in Japan. These differences are consistent with the theory of uncertainty orientation in terms of whether cultural orientations toward uncertainty match or do not match one’s self-regulatory style

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.378 · 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