MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133529616 · doi:10.1177/0022022104273652

Mental Models of Poverty in Developing Nations

2005· article· en· W2133529616 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 · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyResidenceIndex of dissimilarityPsychological interventionIndividualismDeveloping countryCluster (spacecraft)SociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyEconomic growthDemographyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Causal mapping was used to compare poverty activists and non-activists from Canada and the Philippines ( N = 80) in terms of their beliefs about the causes of poverty in developing nations. The causal maps varied as a function of both activist status and country of residence. Activists included more external societal causes in their maps than non-activists, whereas non-activists included more individualistic and internal societal causes. In terms of map structure, Filipino activists included significantly more causal links in their maps than members of the other three groups. A cluster analysis on distance ratios, an index of dissimilarity among the maps, produced three clusters dominated by Filipino non-activists, Canadian non-activists, and Filipino activists, respectively, and a fourth cluster that included a heterogeneous mix of respondents from all four groups. Implications for public education, the effective coordination of antipoverty interventions, and methodological issues related to causal mapping are discussed.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.350 · 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