MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cultural and Personality Determinants of Leniency in Self-Rating among Chinese People

2006· article· en· W2125304551 on OpenAlexaff
Jia Lin Xie, Ziguang Chen, Jean‐Paul Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement and Organization Review · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollectivismExhibitionismPsychologyPersonalityIndividualismSocial psychologyIndividualistic cultureMainland ChinaCultural valuesBig Five personality traitsChinaSociologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines how cultural values (i.e., individualism and collectivism) and personality (i.e., self-perceived superiority and exhibitionism) jointly affect self-rating among Chinese respondents from mainland China (N= 161), Hong Kong (N= 350), and Taiwan (N= 398). The results demonstrated that respondents with a more individualistic cultural orientation exhibit greater leniency in self-rating than those with a more collectivistic cultural orientation. Furthermore, self-perceived superiority and exhibitionism are related to high self-ratings among individuals who expressed low individualism values, but not among individuals who expressed high individualism or collectivism values. The results suggest that self-rating research needs to take both the individual's cultural values and personality traits into account.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement and Organization ReviewSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207